Jump to content

Zaxcom Maxx 2.0?


Jack Norflus

Recommended Posts

 

2 weeks ago I was really thinking on getting  a Zaxcom Maxx, Im using 302, Im glad I waited a bit , but now the choice is hard so 633 or Maxx ?

 

 

This was posted in one of the 633 threads today - I didn't wan't to hijack that thread so I brought it over here.

Newzik - I heard that there are going to be some really kick ass software updates coming for Maxx, so since you waited this long you might want to hang in there

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 121
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

How very coy of Zaxcom to try issuing a spoiler to the successful 633 launch. But why won't they say what improvements they are planning? Well let's speculate. Unless they alter the hardware, which is unlikely, I would hazard a guess that they will implement some of the user requests which were ignored in favour of keeping them for the more expensive machines. Top of the list would be zaxnet, maybe input matrixing and some other improvements. but if you are going to call it v2, then it has to be major and zaxnet is the only feature I can think of that would warrant this. Why not just say so, instead of playing games?

Whatever it is, I doubt it will persuade me not to jump from maxx to 633.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I supect an increase in track count but limited to 48khz, ability record the mono or tape bus on card tracks..maybe a plug in zaxnet module instead of the uhf tx, id like to see preset scene names, tc stabity properly sorted..return avail on mono or tape bus for feeding iem for playback..steeper selectable hpf....id put my money on higher track count..6 iso plus 2 x mix example..just speculating of course..richard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my guess would be more recording tracks. Maybe 2-4 more as it has four analog and four AES plus the two RTN input and current it only does six. But there are only four faders, still need mix pre-D or M32 to help when mixing many mics(extra cost&weight) ( who may already go to Nomad or 664 or even 633 for that purpose) . Yes there is a virtual fader on Maxx's screen, for controlling one ch boom mic that doesn't need much movement might be fine,for real mixing, it's not helping. 

 

No USB/serial port on Maxx is really a shame plus TC IN or OUT only. They afraid to create something better than Nomad so give Maxx few hardware limitation then forgot there r still other manufactories on this planet. 

 

but yes,I would like to see what Zaxcom will bring up for the Maxx. To myself,I would love to keep my Maxx IF zaxcom can make a four faders panel that has two TA5 inputs(for two pair of digital input or four analog from QRX,line level enough,as we can get one pair more output on QRX either analog or digital)) and one TA3 digital output to go in Maxx's digital LINKED IN for mixing purpose. If this device can be made,that's a big IF i know, i would happy to stay with Maxx, if not, i guess i will have to switch. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Better routing options for Maxx would certainly be nice.

Still a KILLER machine, though.

I'm hoping that in the future our manufacture friends will figure out a mixer/recorder/receiver so that EVERYTHING is in one box. And still around the size of Maxx.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mixer/recorder/receiver...will be the next thing IMHO. I don't don't see many other substantial changes manufactures can come up with....I think (from my ignorance) that this can "easily" be done by now, but i guess they are just stretching it . It'll come from zaxcom since they already have their wireless line and it will come from a SD/Lectro fusion! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless there's a breakthrough in nanotechnology or similar, I wonder how much smaller these things will get? Of course, the computational parts will keep on getting smaller every year, but the analogue parts must put some definite restraints.

 

One thing I'm wondering is why they all still use several full-size XLR-inputs and outputs, instead of TA3? Shure, it's practical with the bigger XLR, but at this pricepoint and for use in a bag, most use custom cables as it is. Maybe there's a difference I don't know about, or that it just doesn't have a big impact on size at this  point, so practicality wins.

 

For me, the biggest difference bewteen the two units right now, is the fourth preamp and neverclip on the Maxx, vs the two additional inputs on the 633 (and to a lesser degree, the powersafe function).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tested the Maxx last month, and my opinion was very positive about it, except for a few aspects :

- lack of input gain (a recent update added 10 dB of digital gain, it's a very positive news but is this enough and is it a "clean" added gain, without added noise ? )

- impossible to link the output limiters . Howie from Zaxcom told me this would be a future upgrade .

- the high-pass filters, with their smooth slope (6 dB/octave ?) are not efficient against wind noises

- the headphone amplifier  doesn't let you hear the "real" sound quality  of the Maxx . Its sound is not naural and midrange oriented . If you connect the Maxx to a better headphone amplifier, you can hear a warmer, fuller and more natural sound .

 

I didn't buy the Maxx for these reasons, but if the new version could solve these little problems, I wouldn't hesitate to choose it against  the 633 (nice machine, but I need 4 mic inputs ...) . So, let's hope  ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see this announcement as Maxx launch version 2.0. Attention is going to be focused on the maxx again, which means Deva and Nomad users will have to wait longer to get the rest of the options they were told about. Please prove me wrong.

I hope you are wrong on this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Random thoughts... I would guess size is what it is. Between screen readability and usable knobs.

Maybe newer boxes with be less deep, weigh less and get better battery life. A lot of the bulk in the bags is the wireless mics. Them being modular allows us to mix blocks but obviously contributes to bulk and power draw.

TA plugs are not nearly as robust as the XLR for the boom, but *something* else would work for wireless mics. Zaxcom switched to TA5 outputs for analog and digital, and that's a decent size/weight savings.

That said, there are a bunch of grumps that the 633 and 664 have half their inputs be line level only, let alone lack of phantom power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- the headphone amplifier doesn't let you hear the "real" sound quality of the Maxx . Its sound is not naural and midrange oriented . If you connect the Maxx to a better headphone amplifier, you can hear a warmer, fuller and more natural sound .

I didn't buy the Maxx for these reasons, but if the new version could solve these little problems, I wouldn't hesitate to choose it against the 633 (nice machine, but I need 4 mic inputs ...) . So, let's hope ...

There's a thread on Facebook right now asking if anyone knows of a mod to make the headphone amp on the 664 or 633 better, so maybe people just aren't happy, or need better headphones. I've only used a 664 a little, so I couldn't say about that machine. I've never had an issue with the Deva or Nomad headphone amp. Maybe I'll think about it more sometime while working, but I never felt like they were keeping me from doing my work.

There is also a question of what's a good happy sound, and what lets you detect the details of sound that let you know if you are doing the best you can. I record dialog, not music and rarely nature, so my needs may be different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a thread on Facebook right now asking if anyone knows of a mod to make the headphone amp on the 664 or 633 better, so maybe people just aren't happy, or need better headphones. I've only used a 664 a little, so I couldn't say about that machine. I've never had an issue with the Deva or Nomad headphone amp. Maybe I'll think about it more sometime while working, but I never felt like they were keeping me from doing my work.

There is also a question of what's a good happy sound, and what lets you detect the details of sound that let you know if you are doing the best you can. I record dialog, not music and rarely nature, so my needs may be different.

Where is this thread on Facebook please? It's not in the Sound Devices Facebook page and doesn't seem to be revealed by Google.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see this announcement as Maxx launch version 2.0. Attention is going to be focused on the maxx again, which means Deva and Nomad users will have to wait longer to get the rest of the options they were told about. Please prove me wrong.

Nomad has an internal battery sled and it was said at the time of release that Zaxcom was working on trickle charge to keep the internal NiMh batteries fresh. Probably low on the list of priorities, but that would be nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ERIC D

 

"The headphone amplifier  doesn't let you hear the "real" sound quality  of the Maxx . Its sound is not naural and midrange oriented . If you connect the Maxx to a better headphone amplifier, you can hear a warmer, fuller and more natural sound ."

 

The headphone amp in the Nomad and the MAXX are the same circuit. It is flat from 5 Hz to 22Khz. The MAXX was designed to drive headphones down to about 32 Ohms. We never have complaints on the headphone outs from our customers so I think something else must have been in play here. 

 

 

Glenn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Glenn,

 

Sorry if you take my remark as an offense, this is absolutely not my intention !

As you perfectly know, sound quality is not only a question of numbers or of nice, extended frequency responses ...

When I tested the Maxx (please remember my global opinion was very positive), the sound I heard from the headphone amplifier was very clean and clear but lacking body and slightly fatiguing . But perhaps this was due to a slight problem with the test  machine ?

 

John, no problem with your remark about  "a complete lack of understanding about electronics design" , but could you  please explain why ?

If you add gain, you generally also add some noise, that's why I ask the question .

Thank you very much,

Eric

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, no problem with your remark about "a complete lack of understanding about electronics design" , but could you please explain why ?

If you add gain, you generally also add some noise, that's why I ask the question .

Thank you very much,

Eric

This is digital gain, applied after A/D conversion. It is the same as lifting a fader in a DAW - there is no electronic gain being applied, it is just numbers.

You cannot 'add' noise in this situation (as a ratio of signal to noise), you are simply raising the level of the entire signal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

John, no problem with your remark about "a complete lack of understanding about electronics design" , but could you please explain why ?

If you add gain, you generally also add some noise, that's why I ask the question ...

Sure.

Because, unless there's something grossly wrong with the circuit, the increase in noise is in direct proportion to the amount of gain added. An amplifier amplifies, so if you add more gain, you increase both signal and noise by the same amount. You're having the same effect when you adjust the gain on the front panel pots. The inverse is true, of course, when you lower the gain.

Your earlier post seemed to imply that the increase in circuit gain might somehow disproportionately increase the noise.

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...