Jump to content

Sonosax SX-R4+


pvanstry

Recommended Posts

Hey all!

The new firmware v2.0 is bulletproof and has been successfully tested in the field by myself and a few of my fellow beta-testers. The new firmware comes with a heap of new features. It'll be released shortly.

There's already a whole lot of features on the drawing board for v2.1, but I doubt that we'll see a Rec&Play feature à la Cantar in the near future. Also I can confirm that recording mono files is not yet implemented in the v2.0, but I'll put these suggestions on my personal to-do list.

Thanks guys,

Best from snowy Lake Geneva!

Jürg

8 hours ago, kingkita said:

Editing a 3 hr concert 6 channels at 24/96 is madness.

In which editing software? That would be a piece of cake in Nuendo, for instance, provided you have a reasonably fast computer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10 Jul 2015 at 9:22 PM, soundtrane said:

Obviously some translation issues here. Monsigneur Musy is a veteran sound mixer (he has been around since 1980s and has worked with JLG), so he definitely must have said something that makes sense when translated well.  

you probably already considered this, but you could also convert them to mono files in wave agent.

chris 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which DAW are you using kingkita? I guess you are having to render the 6 channel interleaved files to mono, and this takes a while? Some software lets you separate the channels in the DAW without deinterleaving. I use Reaper with files from a 664, and this works like a dream, you can choose exactly which channels you want in each track, and you can make actions to split multichannel files over tracks.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, chrismedr said:

you probably already considered this, but you could also convert them to mono files in wave agent.

chris 

Yea thats what ive been doing, Im on a mac so ive been using wave agent/audacity/Amadeus Pro/Xact.Running 6 channel Poly splits them around 28 mins 4g( I think can remember right off hand) so that's a lot of piecing going on. Audacity will open 4 channel Poly no issues,6 channel locks it up.Hoping they will give that Mono feature after the 2.0 update.

Here are some live shows i taped still getting used to the deck and knobs a little different than the 744s.

http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=584440

http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=584442

http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=585030

http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=585055

http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=585056

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kingkita said:

Yea thats what ive been doing, Im on a mac so ive been using wave agent/audacity/Amadeus Pro/Xact.Running 6 channel Poly splits them around 28 mins 4g( I think can remember right off hand) so that's a lot of piecing going on. Audacity will open 4 channel Poly no issues,6 channel locks it up.Hoping they will give that Mono feature after the 2.0 update.

Here are some live shows i taped still getting used to the deck and knobs a little different than the 744s.

http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=584440

http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=584442

http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=585030

http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=585055

http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=585056

There should be an automatic file split option in v2.0.  I know this because I did a 90min 10ch recording and found it does it in one file which breaks the 4GB max filesize in wav specifications and most software won't open the whole thing..

I found Reaper will open these large files and expand poly wavs (had to use that and split to mono to send to the editor)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
On March 15, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Richard Thomas said:

Here's some thoughts after using the machine in anger with the v2.0 firmware (it'll be v2.1 on release, very soon):
http://rtsound.net/?p=501

Thanks for this. I've found the ability to auto mix incredibly useful, so it would be great to have something here. Truthfully, the automixers included with Zaxcom and SD are fairly simplistic and use gating or noise expansion. If there was a way to license something from Dugan, it could be indispensable, especially with the fader pack and additional input unit for cart use.

Not to sound hostile, but given recent events with the Zaxcom dual-converters, I'm going to guess there won't be any licensing discussions for such a thing. Plus there are probably some licensing complications with Yamaha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jeremiah Sheets said:

 If there was a way to license something from Dugan, it could be indispensable, especially with the fader pack and additional input unit for cart use.
 

From what I know the Dugan patent has expired now, hence quite a few more machines with it are appearing. Even Behringer are getting in on this: http://www.music-group.com/Categories/Behringer/Mixers/Digital-Mixers/XR18/p/P0BI8


 TBH I'm not entirely sure automix is Sonosax's thing either.  It was quite funny when Pierre was asked if it did mp3 recording "no, we wouldn't want to degrade the quality"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Richard Thomas said:

It was quite funny when Pierre was asked if it did mp3 recording "no, we wouldn't want to degrade the quality"

To me that means that they assume their users are dumb and might record in MP3 format by mistake. As if we don't know any better.
I'm pretty sure that the people that can pay for this equipment and are using it in a professional environment that might effect the "Sonosax" name would know enough to use the appropriate settings.
Sometimes, MP3 is requested at end of day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was ready to buy one had the cash in my hand could have worked with its limited analogue outputs, but no output limiters ,no input delay and only able to mix 4 inputs without an external mixer killed it for me ..but the market they want is obviously satisfied...I do think they missed a trick tho..Richard

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I think it's important to view this recorder for what it is, rather than what it is not. 

Richard gave us all an excellent review that I found pertinent to our needs as production mixers.

As we all know, there isn't one recorder out there that is perfect for every one of us in every situation. 

If you give this little recorder a test drive, you'll find that it sounds excellent, is quick and easy to navigate, and seems to perform as advertised. Simple as that. Is it for everyone? Of course not. Only the one driving can be the judge of that.

Regards,

Moe

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Richard Thomas said:

From what I know the Dugan patent has expired now, hence quite a few more machines with it are appearing. Even Behringer are getting in on this:

 

<Pedantic>   The original automix patent is expired, but he developed more advanced versions as well.   His name though, is not expired, and requires appropriate licensing if an entity wants to use the method described in the original patent in conjunction with his name.  Mr Dugan is apparently not happy with Music Group for using his name in their product uncompensated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Patrick Tresch said:

Hello Richard,

In your daily use, would you need a limiter when using the R4+?

Thanks

Pat

Ideally, no- but occasionally things do get a bit out of control (or my mixing's a bit off).  For some reason I seem to find the mix tracks on the R4+ seem to be a bit forgiving if you hit 0dB (might be to do with the meters), while the ISOs are not.  I've been running it with tracks going the mix at +10dB; because of the extra dynamic range it is possible to give the ISOs a lot of headroom without any quality loss.  

Due to the way the gain structure can be set up I don't believe input limiters should be necessary, but limiters on the mix should

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's great the way the gain can be structured within the machine to have safe isos and a forgiving mix but if the recorder gets the balanced O/Ps wont it at least need limiters on the O/Ps as some clients still like a hardwire send to camera when possible (even if they've signed off a radio link to camera and/or separate sound)?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However much headroom you give iso's ( which means you are recording at relatively low levels), completely unexpected events occur, such as shouting, door slams, things smashed on a table or floor etc etc. You should be protected from going into distortion for such unpredictable events. The dual converters means the dynamic range is huge (and no distortion at the inputs, so no limiters needed), but also means that wonderful dynamic range can trip you up at record and output level. It is no more than a safety net, which catches the unpredictable, and unrepeatable.

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...