Jump to content

Sonosax SX-R4+


pvanstry

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Richard Thomas said:

I've not had any issues- centre scan on wisycom doesn't pull up much (my SX-R4 and SX-M32 have a load around 470MHz)

Thanks. I have a couple of SRb's (22 & 24) and I'm tired of the 788's RF garbage and weight. So I'm seriously thinking about to dump my 788 for a RX4+  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good to hear!

I still would like to know a couple of things before I switch  my 788/cl8 for aRX4+

When connected to RC8+ or the AD8+, how does the future control unit with faders connect to the RX4+?

I wished that there were another port then the AES multipin for controllers, so that wireless receivers could be connected to the RX4+ at all times, so it would be easy to go between the RC8+/AD8+ and the fader control unit. Bag vs cart mode.

Like it it's done with the 788/CL8 and 788/CL9. Or how would you do it?

For example:

If I'm in bag mode with the RX4+ and AD8+ or theRC8+, all wireless would be connected through the AES breakout TA3 connectors on the RC8+ or the XLR's on the AD8+. If I then go with the fader controller for cart mode, would I have to disconnect the AD8+/RC8+? 

Ive read this thread 3 times but still haven't figured out the connections/controller philosophy. 

Kind regards

john


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI: new firmware update

 

SONOSAX SX-R4+ FIRMWARES

 

VERSION 2.2
May 2016
 

CHANGELOG

Added optional XLR5-M output card support

Fixed input level bug: when entering fader mode with pot closed, level was frozen to MUTE.

Fixed track menu bug: in some rare case, modifications were not saved

Fixed SD card 'SPEED' error

 

2 hours ago, John Ronnerblad said:

Good to hear!

I still would like to know a couple of things before I switch  my 788/cl8 for aRX4+

When connected to RC8+ or the AD8+, how does the future control unit with faders connect to the RX4+?

I wished that there were another port then the AES multipin for controllers, so that wireless receivers could be connected to the RX4+ at all times, so it would be easy to go between the RC8+/AD8+ and the fader control unit. Bag vs cart mode.

Like it it's done with the 788/CL8 and 788/CL9. Or how would you do it?

For example:

If I'm in bag mode with the RX4+ and AD8+ or theRC8+, all wireless would be connected through the AES breakout TA3 connectors on the RC8+ or the XLR's on the AD8+. If I then go with the fader controller for cart mode, would I have to disconnect the AD8+/RC8+? 

Ive read this thread 3 times but still haven't figured out the connections/controller philosophy. 

Kind regards

john


 

If you look at the block diagram, there are 2 serial ports on the accessory connector so one could be connected to the AD8+/RC8+ and another to the fader controller. It would require some custom cabling (possibly something Sonosax could provide).

As far as I know the AD8+ and RC8+ are yet to ship and the fader surface design is being looked at again, though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

New page up

http://www.sonosax.ch/

although not much new info as far as I see on first look. However I'll take the opportunity to finally raise my points on the RC8+ since its been discussed less than I thought it might be so far here. Firstly, I'll point out (for Jacque's benefit as well as others') that I'm really not likely to be an end user of such a module, although both the R4+ and AD8+ are very much on my future wish list for multichannel recording: I record (and edit) but don't mix, nor send audio to cameras etc.

So, whilst I feel that the R4+ is ergonomically near excellent, with great features for its size - a nice size at that, and 'suffers' over a certain area of the market (albeit not my own) by a lack of outputs and a 'convenient' mixing surface, I think there's a few things 'wrong' about the RC8+ in its own ergonomics and features.

Firstly the size: I am really offput by the height of the box, which doubles the footprint of the R4+ if used with it in a bag. Would it not be far preferable to be thinner? I'm thinking a maximum height of 40mm which would be enough for the existing connectors and enough for say standard XLRs (of which more soon ... ). Although the staggered nature of the pots on the R4+ and AD8+ might be a nice ergonomic idea per se, I would far rather just have 8 pots closer together in a line (or just slightly staggered) across the front and lose 10-15mm from the unit. If things could be jiggered around inside, I see no reason why it could not be LONGER to make up for it - indeed, apart from a slight increase in body weight, would this be worse for anybody's bag setup?

Aside from that, if feasible, would it be a good idea to use the extra real estate thus afforded even further by providing additional output options (additional to that already on the R4+) : principally 2 x XLR3s (which could be standard analog balanced outs as well as perhaps switchable to other configurations) but perhaps ALSO one or two more TA3s (for fixed or preferably unfixed use). And perhaps that DANTE connector could now survive there permanently.

The AES inputs and Hirose power sockets already provided are a great idea: they could go anywhere surely to make space for further output options? Along the back even if it ended up being just a little shorter than the main R4+ unit. Since multiple outputs were most people's early gripes that's what I've focused on. Any other wish list ideas by existing or potential R4+ users? Again, 'existing' extra HP out and slate/com a very good idea - any wishes to augment the slate/com in any way (button, boom return ...?). Any features from the existing Sonosax range (the 62R or even desk models) that users would wish to be incorporated into this unit?

These are just ideas ... for my own use I wouldn't mind having two more matched preamp channels (even without AES out or full AES3 capability) to push it up to a 6 channel recorder but such things might just bang the cost up, so I wouldn't really expect it to be worthwhile. But I'm curious if Sonosax are missing just a handful of features which would broaden the use and therefore appeal to a wider pool of users. If in the end I'm only moaning about 10 extra millimetres of height so be it, but for me presently the R4+ and the AD8+ are pretty much the perfect package so I'm curious whether a few changes to the mixer module could make it perfect for anyone else?

Jez

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love that they might have listen to my recommendation for a controller unit.

 RC8+ is a cool addition:

A dedicated front panel for the SX-R4+ providing 8 rotary faders with function switch to extend mixing facilities in the field. The SX-RC8+ provides 4x TA3 connectors ued as AES breakout box for the multi-pin AES input connector on the SX-R4+, allowing easy connection of AES sources such as digital wireless receivers, and 5x Hirose 4-pin for power distribution. It also offers an additional phone output and a Slate/Com microphone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The XLR5 output board is now shipping (switchable between 2ch balanced analogue, 4ch AES3, 4ch unbalanced analogue), priced at CHF390

On 01/06/2016 at 7:35 PM, The Immoral Mr Teas said:

New page up

http://www.sonosax.ch/

although not much new info as far as I see on first look. However I'll take the opportunity to finally raise my points on the RC8+ since its been discussed less than I thought it might be so far here. Firstly, I'll point out (for Jacque's benefit as well as others') that I'm really not likely to be an end user of such a module, although both the R4+ and AD8+ are very much on my future wish list for multichannel recording: I record (and edit) but don't mix, nor send audio to cameras etc.

So, whilst I feel that the R4+ is ergonomically near excellent, with great features for its size - a nice size at that, and 'suffers' over a certain area of the market (albeit not my own) by a lack of outputs and a 'convenient' mixing surface, I think there's a few things 'wrong' about the RC8+ in its own ergonomics and features.

Firstly the size: I am really offput by the height of the box, which doubles the footprint of the R4+ if used with it in a bag. Would it not be far preferable to be thinner? I'm thinking a maximum height of 40mm which would be enough for the existing connectors and enough for say standard XLRs (of which more soon ... ). Although the staggered nature of the pots on the R4+ and AD8+ might be a nice ergonomic idea per se, I would far rather just have 8 pots closer together in a line (or just slightly staggered) across the front and lose 10-15mm from the unit. If things could be jiggered around inside, I see no reason why it could not be LONGER to make up for it - indeed, apart from a slight increase in body weight, would this be worse for anybody's bag setup?

Aside from that, if feasible, would it be a good idea to use the extra real estate thus afforded even further by providing additional output options (additional to that already on the R4+) : principally 2 x XLR3s (which could be standard analog balanced outs as well as perhaps switchable to other configurations) but perhaps ALSO one or two more TA3s (for fixed or preferably unfixed use). And perhaps that DANTE connector could now survive there permanently.

The AES inputs and Hirose power sockets already provided are a great idea: they could go anywhere surely to make space for further output options? Along the back even if it ended up being just a little shorter than the main R4+ unit. Since multiple outputs were most people's early gripes that's what I've focused on. Any other wish list ideas by existing or potential R4+ users? Again, 'existing' extra HP out and slate/com a very good idea - any wishes to augment the slate/com in any way (button, boom return ...?). Any features from the existing Sonosax range (the 62R or even desk models) that users would wish to be incorporated into this unit?

These are just ideas ... for my own use I wouldn't mind having two more matched preamp channels (even without AES out or full AES3 capability) to push it up to a 6 channel recorder but such things might just bang the cost up, so I wouldn't really expect it to be worthwhile. But I'm curious if Sonosax are missing just a handful of features which would broaden the use and therefore appeal to a wider pool of users. If in the end I'm only moaning about 10 extra millimetres of height so be it, but for me presently the R4+ and the AD8+ are pretty much the perfect package so I'm curious whether a few changes to the mixer module could make it perfect for anyone else?

Jez

 I think the RC8+ is limited with ins/outs by what's on the accessory port- it uses an AES channel for the slate mic.  Currently I'm using the analogue line in with a fostex preamp for slate and using a spare channel. I'd like to enable a mix routing preset as a shortcut for slate mic purposes (would probably use the analogue pots for this).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey all!

I just finished 37 days shooting a drama in the Alps in very cold and foggy weather with the SX-R4+ as my cart recorder and I'm very pleased with the results.

The R4+ was fed with six ISO channels through the analog inputs and four mix tracks through the AES inputs, the ISOs coming in from the direct outputs and the mix tracks from the AES outputs of my SX-ES84. Recorded up to 10 tracks 48 kHz 24 bits on the R4+ without a hitch on cheap SanDisk Ultra 16GB 80 MB/s SD cards in slot SD1 and a SanDisk Ultra 64GB 40 MB/s card as a backup in slot SD2.

Initially I planned to use the R4+'s Web Interface for metadata input, but finally decided to stick to my MovieSlate 8 app on the iPad Mini because I didn't want to change my whole trusted workflow all at once.

I had absolutely no issues with TC, the R4+ and both Arri Alexa Mini cameras were fed 24fps TOD TC from Tentacle Sync boxes and sync stayed within half a frame all day long on every shooting day.

Scene, Take and Track Name metadata entry, as well as Track Arming was quick and easy thanks to the programmable shortcuts on the touch screen.

I used my mixer for slating and for my Private Line with my boom op and the R4+'s Analog Aux Output to feed my main mix to a Lectro T1 IFB transmitter.

As my ISOs and Mix Tracks don't come in through the same hardware interface (analog vs AES), there is a slight constant delay of a few milliseconds between them. I know that there's some latency in any A/D converter, so I guess that the AES A/D board in my SX-ES84 has a tad more latency than the A/D converters of the R4+'s analog inputs, which would explain why my Mix Tracks are a few milliseconds late. That should be easy to fix with an adjustable delay on the R4+'s inputs in a future firmware update.

I'm very happy with my new drama cart setup!

Cheers,

Jürg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been on a low budget drama job for the last few weeks and mainly used the R4+ on its own. Haven't used the wifi as I don't have the external antenna mod but have been using reports generated on the machine. Metadata has also carried on through the workflow from davinci resolve to Avid and the assembly editor is receiving it all.

Been running an additional preamp for an external slate mic on the line inputs (to free up the main fader knobs)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Richard Thomas said:

Metadata has also carried on through the workflow from davinci resolve to Avid and the assembly editor is receiving it all.

Hey Richard,

Great to know, thanks. Our DIT used DaVinci as well, and I haven't had any feedback from the post crew until now, so your comment is kind of a relief.

7 hours ago, Olle Sjostrom said:

That's great to know! Glad to know that the tentacles can handle that weather too

Hey Olle,

Well, one of my Tentacles died after a few days out in the freezing cold, but I couldn't tell if it was due to temperature, to humidity on some foggy mornings or if it would've died anyway because of a hardware fault... I quickly sent a mail to Tentacle Sync's excellent service department and have had a shiny new Tentacle delivered by UPS on location a few days later, no questions asked. Nevertheless, I'm still glad I bought a handful Tentacles back then when they were calling for funding on Indiegogo. At that price, it's always good to have a spare or two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Jurg, nice to see the R4+ being used out in the wild.

I've been interested in the machine as well. I live in Toronto here so one of my main questions was how using the touch screen would fair in extreme cold and snow and operating it wearing gloves.

Any issues with it on your job in the snowy Alps? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Neil Mc

It was quite cold, we had a few days shooting in sub-zero temperatures, but the conditions weren't that extreme. However, I had a strange shooting day in Singapore in January where we were shooting in extremely damp and hot weather and during one of those frequent flash thunderstorms, we suddenly followed someone into a huge industrial freezer at -18 degrees centigrade while filming. We stayed there for 15 to 20 minutes and got out again, still shooting. My R4+ kept rolling without a hitch even with the extreme condensation - I could barely hold my boompole as it was dripping with condensation - whereas the lens on the camera (and my reading glasses as well) became unusable within seconds of walking out of the freezer...

Even in sub-zero temperatures in the Alps, the R4+'s touchscreen stayed responsive all the time, but it would be difficult to use it while wearing gloves. Maybe a pair of thin, iOS compatible gloves would work, I'll have to test that.

Cheers,

Jürg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The touchscreen is resistive, so will work with pens/pokey things etc too- I tend to use one when entering notes as the letter keys are a it smaller.  I've done a few days in a very hot and humid room lately, again it works well, although it's easier to accidentally get the wrong part of the screen with sweaty fingers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mikko Kolehmainen said:

Yes you can.

Yes, you can. The R4+'s web interface in its current form (it is being redesigned actively as we speak to reflect the design of the AD8+'s web interface) actually mirrors the current state of the machine. So you may change track arming, track names, project name, scene and take numbers and the note for the upcoming take, as well as for the take being recorded. If you want to change metadata for the last recorded take, you have to manually load the last take into the player mode on the machine itself. The web interface will then show the metadata of that take and you may edit it to your liking. This is very likely to change with the new incarnation of the web interface, which will allow editing more or less every parameter of the machine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Olle!

If my memory serves me well, it is Java code injected into a HTML container, which makes the code quite huge at the moment. The AD8+'s web interface is pure Java and the new incarnation of the R4+'s web interface will be pure Java as well. But I could be wrong, I'll ask that question to Sonosax's software guru...

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...