Sounddevices 633 for classical cd-production? Or the SD 7er series?

[paco de colonia]

Hello,

 

my name ist Dirk, i´m classical recordist in cologne/germany.

 

I´m looking for lightweight, small equipment to record small classical ensembles.

Last year, i got a Sound Devices 702 from a friend for a weekend, recording opera singer

accompagnied from a grand piano.

 

I was very surprised from the good sound quality which was near my RME UFX+ Macbook recordings

using Schoeps microphones.

 

Is the sound quality from the 633 in critical classical music comparable to the SD 7 series?

Has anybody compared the SD 6 and 7 by classical recordings?

The technical notes of the micpres and AD/DA are different, but sound and technic are different choses...

 

If the 633 is really comparable with the 702, this would be the goal for me!

 

Thank you for your request

Dirk

 

 

 

 

[soundslikejustin]

Yes, the specs and measurement are different. In terms of how they sound, I think i like the 7-series pre's JUST a little tiny bit more. But not much at all. Obviously, that's a totally subjective comparison and you should make up your own mind on the sound.

 

I'd be curious to know what you intend to use the 633 for - you're only gaining 1 mic pre over the 7 series...Decca Tree?

 

As with most products made for location/production sound, the SD mixers and recorders are geared towards recording VOICE/production noises. It's even mentioned in the manuals a few times. They can work for classical music, but I think there are better options, unless you need intense portability.

[JDirckze]

If money were no object, I would definitely be looking at either a Nagra V or VI...

[Constantin]

For classical music the THD specs may be more relevant than for location sound and the 7 series has much better values here. As does the Maxx, btw which may also be quite useful for concert recordings and it adds yet another pre.

[Richard Thomas]

Sonosax SX-R4 (discontinued, but a new model has been due for a while) and AETA 4Minx also sound very good (I'd say both sound better than the 7 series) and both have 4 preamps

[Tom Visser]

788t would give you the most flexibility if you are going to start adding spot mics or some more complex arrays, since it has 8 preamps.  The 633 only has 3 mic preamps, which is perfectly fine for a spaced/coincident pair + an accent.  The Nagra VI does have 6 excellent preamps and offers transformerless AND transformer options if that floats your boat.  They also offered some advanced soundfield monitoring modes over and above the usual M-S fare.  I also feel that the monitoring section on the N VI is the best in class and sometimes your job as quality control is at least equally important as the absolute fidelity of the recorded signal chain.

 

Generically, music is mostly about tone.  With classical, however, since you have to cover such large dynamic ranges and combine powerful passages with delicate nearly inaudible ones - yes absolute noise floor performance is critical.  It is probably here at the extreme (quiet) end of the spectrum where the different platforms start to show their strengths and weaknesses.  Otherwise at moderate and loud levels, a 633 is probably mostly indistinguishable from a 788 or Nagra VI, which are much more expensive options.  Quite frankly - all of the preamps mentioned here are rather cool and clinical when it comes to music recording.  I personally think that is a good thing, but some people swear by the little bit of shimmer that one gets from Millennia Media mic amps, for example.

[ShubiSnax]

I think if I were in your situation, I would be leaning more towards Metric Halo products than Sound Devices.

 

hxxp://mhsecure.com/metric_halo/products/hardware/lio-8.html

[glenn]

" With classical, however, since you have to cover such large dynamic ranges and combine powerful passages with delicate nearly inaudible ones - yes absolute noise floor performance is critical."

 

If you are looking at portable solutions the Zaxcom MAXX with its 136 dB Dynamic range input would give you the ability to capture a classical performance quite well . The MAXX will have a greater dynamic range than the Microphones you are using so no limiting will be needed to keep inputs from clipping on the recorder.  Since no input gain changes will be necessary the noise floor of the preamp will be constant. In the case of MAXX this will be around -116 dBu if 24 dB of Neverclip attenuation is utilized. MAXX now can output the Neverclip signal with attenuation on its AES output so it can be used as a front end for other recorders.

 

Glenn

[Cloud Wang]

" With classical, however, since you have to cover such large dynamic ranges and combine powerful passages with delicate nearly inaudible ones - yes absolute noise floor performance is critical."

 

If you are looking at portable solutions the Zaxcom MAXX with its 136 dB Dynamic range input would give you the ability to capture a classical performance quite well . The MAXX will have a greater dynamic range than the Microphones you are using so no limiting will be needed to keep inputs from clipping on the recorder.  Since no input gain changes will be necessary the noise floor of the preamp will be constant. In the case of MAXX this will be around -116 dBu if 24 dB of Neverclip attenuation is utilized. MAXX now can output the Neverclip signal with attenuation on its AES output so it can be used as a front end for other recorders.

 

Glenn

Hi Glenn

Have you start to remove that 80Hz cut off on pre-amp of Maxx yet ?? My unit will arrive to the factory this week and I hope this can be done as well other small issues.

Thanks

Cloud

[paco de colonia]

I think if I were in your situation, I would be leaning more towards Metric Halo products than Sound Devices.

 

hxxp://mhsecure.com/metric_halo/products/hardware/lio-8.html

A Metric Halo 2882 was one of my first recording tools.

I was very disapointed, because the really hiss (not the measured) was not so good.

The i bought the RME UFX (see my test in "Professional Audio" of summer 2010).

 

This tool, or my Massenburg 8304 with Aurora-Lynx AD are my favorite things in studio.

 

But i want to get a sound, not so far away from this.

Only plug an play. 2-3 Schoeps miniature microphones with AB/ORTFL/EBS, without connected with 240V, 

for "quick and dirty high quality jobs".

 

For small events with a solist (almost violin, cello, sopran) accompagnied from pianco or small ensemble.

Or a solist (lute, guitar...) with 2 main microphones an 1 microphone closed by the musician.

 

Dirk

[VASI]

I prefer the transformers design for musical purposes (like Rupert Neve). But I like to play someday with this beast.

[Tom Visser]

Regarding Metric Halo preamps, the 2882 is a wonderful all-around-tool, but the preamps were mainly designed with rock and roll and pop in mind, or to be a simple line-in box with utility preamps available.  When they introduced the ULN-2 design, they upgraded the preamps to something that could be used as first line amps.  The ULN-8 was an evolutionary improvement on the ULN-2 design and is fully digitally controlled.  I'm not necessarily advocating bringing a computer to a recording gig, but if you go that direction, I wouldn't discount the MH ULN line based upon your 2882 experience.

 

I'm with Vasileios, though, something with a bit of color should be just A OK with classical - there is a modern aesthetic to go with clinical, but RCA made quite a few ok sounding recordings using some colorful gear.

 

My dream signal chain would be an couple of EAR 824 into a Studer portable mixer or maybe one of Rupert Neve's new 5088 consoles (they make a miniature 8 channel version without upper penthouse) and an EAR 660 strapped on the master buss.

[VM]

...Decca Tree?

 

 

I am not sure that you can link 3 faders in the 633. If you want to use a decca tree or any multichannel system you need the ability to link the faders.

SXR4 has only a 130 Hz lowcut filters, that is really too high. 40 Hz is a  good start for musical recording.

 

Anyway do not forgot that the most important is not the recorder but you (your work). 

[ramallo]

I get good experiences recording music using the Zaxcom Nomad, although is not a device designed to record music. (But is a audio recorder after all).

[Angelo Waldron]

Perhaps a "Mini-Cooper" .... iron included.

[drpro]

For me a set of Gordon preamps into your recorder of choice.  Not portable, but oh so nice.

 

David

[Herbert Verdino]

Two weeks ago, I recorded some meditation instruments, singing bowls, gongs, monochord and other stuff.

I used my Sennheiser MS stereo pair (Mkh 50 + 30) and recorded everything on my Aaton Cantar.

The result was actually quite good. The Cantar preamps handled the high dynamic ranges very well.

 

The Aeta and the Sonosax mentioned before, are using the same preamp chip as the Cantar, as far as I know.

But pleas correct me, if I am wrong.

 

best... 

[JonG]

I recorded an opera with my 788T. Sounded great. Ive also done similar recordings with my SSL mic pres, and can safely say that they are both clean and high quality systems. The SoundDevices mic press have more dynamic range, and those on their mixers have decent limiters. As Glen pointed out, the mic pres on the Zaxcom products feature NeverClip, and have great dynamic range, so for recording classical music, that might be your best bet.

[paco de colonia]

Regarding Metric Halo preamps, the 2882 is a wonderful all-around-tool, but the preamps were mainly designed with rock and roll and pop in mind, or to be a simple line-in box with utility preamps available.  When they introduced the ULN-2 design, they upgraded the preamps to something that could be used as first line amps.  The ULN-8 was an evolutionary improvement on the ULN-2 design and is fully digitally controlled.  I'm not necessarily advocating bringing a computer to a recording gig, but if you go that direction, I wouldn't discount the MH ULN line based upon your 2882 experience.

 

I'm with Vasileios, though, something with a bit of color should be just A OK with classical - there is a modern aesthetic to go with clinical, but RCA made quite a few ok sounding recordings using some colorful gear.

 

My dream signal chain would be an couple of EAR 824 into a Studer portable mixer or maybe one of Rupert Neve's new 5088 consoles (they make a miniature 8 channel version without upper penthouse) and an EAR 660 strapped on the master buss.

 

I´ve heard, that the big MH-Ships are very nice, but they´re Computer Interfaces, not Standalone recorders...

[paco de colonia]

I recorded an opera with my 788T. Sounded great. Ive also done similar recordings with my SSL mic pres, and can safely say that they are both clean and high quality systems. The SoundDevices mic press have more dynamic range, and those on their mixers have decent limiters. As Glen pointed out, the mic pres on the Zaxcom products feature NeverClip, and have great dynamic range, so for recording classical music, that might be your best bet.

Yes, the 788 sounds really great. But i´m looking for a "little 788", would say: half price, half weight and half size.

The possibility, to record at SD + CD at the same time for me is a killer application:

My client can get a 2-channel mix from the live recording directly after the concert, if there are some things for the postproduction i can make a new mix with the other card.

 

One of the most important things for me: nobody can notice much technical things, no rack, no macbook, no DC.

Only a small recorder on the neighbour-chair with some miniatur-Schoeps.

This could be a Unique Selling Proposition...

 

Dirk

[filmfreak]

I would also suggest on my turn to stick Rupert Neve pres on a recorder of choice.
The Portico 5012 or another of the Portico series will do a fine job.
 

http://rupertneve.com/products/portico-5012/

 

All this is trully great but not a single person has answered Dirk's original question.

Anyone used the 633 - additional insert > or even the 644 - back to back with a 7 series recorder ?

 

[paco de colonia]

I would also suggest on my turn to stick Rupert Neve pres on a recorder of choice.

The Portico 5012 or another of the Portico series will do a fine job.

 

http://rupertneve.com/products/portico-5012/

 

All this is trully great but not a single person has answered Dirk's original question.

Anyone used the 633 - additional insert > or even the 644 - back to back with a 7 series recorder ?

 

Indeed...

[Constantin]

All this is trully great but not a single person has answered Dirk's original question.

Anyone used the 633 - additional insert > or even the 644 - back to back with a 7 series recorder ?

I totally didn't get that he was looking to use the 633 with a 7 series recorder. I thought he was looking for someone who had used the 633 for classical recordings and generally for an ultra mobile rig.

Many have answered that question, although many didn't focus on the mobile aspect.

I woiuld like to repeat some of the advice above and say that the Cantar (possibly the best sounding mobile recorder - to my ears), the Sound Devices 788T (lots of inputs), the Maxx, the Nomad and others are all very compact high quality recorders. For this purpose though and depending on personal taste, I would steer clear of a device that's primarily a mixer. Also, I'd try to get the cleanest amps possible. If you want color you can always add it later

[Michael Wynne]

Although i have not done classical recordings with the 7 series and 633 back to back, I have owned a 702T and now own a 633 and have done low level outdoor stereo ambience recordings with both and although the 633 pre amps do sound good, the 7 series preamps are noticeably quieter. So if you had to choose between the two for classical recordings I would go with the 7 series recorder.

[paco de colonia]

Although i have not done classical recordings with the 7 series and 633 back to back, I have owned a 702T and now own a 633 and have done low level outdoor stereo ambience recordings with both and although the 633 pre amps do sound good, the 7 series preamps are noticeably quieter. So if you had to choose between the two for classical recordings I would go with the 7 series recorder.

Uups, this would be a real argument against the 633. Especially by recording quiet solo instruments like lute, theorbe etc. with main micros in the room by AB, ORTF. Has anyone made the same experience by AB-Testing?