Sonosax SX-R4+

[John Blankenship]

So, a company appropriates the intellectual property of another company and there are those who are upset at the party the property was taken from?

An example of rather skewed values, IMO, and a prima facie example of a couple of points I was making earlier in this thread.

[Erkal Taskin]

So, we still do not know if there is any infringement yet. I think it has been pointed out already.

 

[Patrick Tresch]

Firts of all, the patent thing was boring me but there was to much nonsense said in the last posts so I had to add one more thing on this topic.  My appoligies for the R4+ fans.

 

So, a company appropriates the intellectual property of another company and there are those who are upset at the party the property was taken from?

 

Well, you are talking to fast.

Zaxcom didn't invent HDR by combining two preamps, they just patented a tech wich was long used by many facturers (like Kodak) since late 80's. Their patent is based on a specific way of doing the switch where one preamp is used over the other one. There aren't a trillion of way of doing it right in the digital domain, so even if Zaxcom's way is not copied on Sonosax's way there are a lof of chances that they are close to each other. Think of it as the tech used in the bathroom sink for mixing hot and cold water... ;-). If I where Sonosax I wouldn't be happy to show them the solution as in the present time Zaxcom is the predator.

In my opinion, the real story behind this, is a company triying to get the monopole on some tech by patenting it, and so preventing other brands selling a well knowned tech. They are doing so with a lot of other products not only with high dynamic range preamps. I wonder where they are putting their efforts in real inventions?

There are a lot of not patented tech that are used in the industry, the difference between brands is how they make use of it. THIS is what makes a product a more interesting one.

I think that Zaxcom attitude is not very good for the competition nor for the customer.

My 2 cents.

Pat

Edited November 7, 2015 by Patrick Tresch

[Jeff Wexler]

Patrick says: "Firts of all, the patent thing was boring me but there was to much nonsense said in the last posts so I had to add one more thing on this topic.  My appoligies for the R4+ fans."

Don't apollogize just to R4+ fans, apologize to all of us --- I really wish these discussions that relate more to patent - political - legal issues could taker place in the other topic I started rather than here in the Sonosax topic. I am a big fan of the Sonosax products, have been since the very beginning, and this thread started out to be about their new recorder not a bitch fest about Zaxcom or freedom of choice or predatory business practices and so on. We all have our opinions, well informed, or not, regarding the patents, the technology, who is to blame for our misery, etc., let's try and get this topic back on track --- information, user experiences, specifications, wish lists for the SX-R4+.

[John Blankenship]

Agreed, Jeff.  Apologies for my part in engaging this ridiculousness.

 

[Erkal Taskin]

Firts of all, the patent thing was boring me but there was to much nonsense said in the last posts so I had to add one more thing on this topic.  My appoligies for the R4+ fans.

 

 

Well, you are talking to fast.

Zaxcom didn't invent HDR by combining two preamps, they just patented a tech wich was long used by many facturers (like Kodak) since late 80's. Their patent is based on a specific way of doing the switch where one preamp is used over the other one. There aren't a trillion of way of doing it right in the digital domain, so even if Zaxcom's way is not copied on Sonosax's way there are a lof of chances that they are close to each other. Think of it as the tech used in the bathroom sink for mixing hot and cold water... ;-). If I where Sonosax I wouldn't be happy to show them the solution as in the present time Zaxcom is the predator.

In my opinion, the real story behind this, is a company triying to get the monopole on some tech by patenting it, and so preventing other brands selling a well knowned tech. They are doing so with a lot of other products not only with high dynamic range preamps. I wonder where they are putting their efforts in real inventions?

There are a lot of not patented tech that are used in the industry, the difference between brands is how they make use of it. THIS is what makes a product a more interesting one.

I think that Zaxcom attitude is not very good for the competition nor for the customer.

My 2 cents.

Pat

Well said, thank you.

[RadoStefanov]

I would be happy to get 5-6 AES3 inputs "2 of them AES42" maxx and have all analog Ins taken out.

Or a 16 channel all digital nomad with 2 AES42 and 6 AES3 inputs.

No analog inputs but 2 AUX ta5 for when I need to record phones, FOH and others. 4 Analog outputs can stay just in case.

For my personal use analog microphones, preamps and frontends are just not reliable and in Zaxcom nomad case need some calibration at times.

I know they work 99% of the time but this 1 time that they give me issues is not fun at all. Like getting interference with zaxnet, cellphones, high power electronics.

I prefer to avoid RF interference and other downsides of analog.

 

Edited November 7, 2015 by RadoStefanov

[RadoStefanov]

The point being while people are arguing and fighting about some analog front end technology, I don't really care about neverclip.

[JAX]

Hello Soundfriends,

My answer. in english:http://sonosax.ch/recorders/sx-r4p/AUDIO_PATENTS.pdf

In french: http://sonosax.ch/recorders/sx-r4p/AUDIO_BREVETS.pdf

Have a nice day,

Jacques Sax

[Masaki Hatsui]

The point being while people are arguing and fighting about some analog front end technology, I don't really care about neverclip.

It is as if same to say "I'm living in Europe, I don't really care about Zaxcom - Sonosax patent war in the other side of planet".

[glenn]

 

I need to correct this fantasy that Jax seems to have with this situation. I can not allow fiction to be confused with fact.

"When we announced the arrival of the SONOSAX SX-R4+, this company immediately asked us to provide them with a machine as well as detailed circuit schemas and threatened us with lawsuits should we market in the USA a product that could, potentially, be liable under their patent. "

Zaxcom never I repeat never threatened Sonosax with a lawsuit.  We also never asked for detailed circuit schematics. What we did do is ask for conformation as to how he was achieving the published specification for his recorder. If it was found that the recorder was using our technology we offered the possibility of a license so the product could be sold in the USA.

"We have proposed to meet with the President of this company ; he has refused. It is thus clear for me that we will never deal on any level with a person who is incapable of a face to face dialogue... "

I have sent about 7 emails to Jac regarding this issue. I have told him of our desire to get the technical information necessary to determine if there is in fact any problem at all with him selling his product in the United States. He has refused to provide any information. All correspondence in this matter must be written in nature so there is a record of it. 

"Although well-known for a long period, the double ADC method was patented in the United States by an American company who has simply appropriated this « invention. » The validity of the patent is thus questionable. "

The method of using 2 ADC on each input is not what is patented. It is how the data is combined into a single stream. The word appropriated implies theft and that is wrong. The Patent office like with any patent looks for prior art. When none is found a patent if appropriate is issued for the invention submitted.  In our first communication with Jac we gave him our patent number and expressed the desire to work with him.  The only thing that has happened since was his decision to not sell machines in the USA. This was based solely on only our questions to him  and his  reading of our patent. We are ready to "meet" with Jac via Email to resolve this issue. 

Patents are important to protect the rights of the inventors. No one questions Neuman on their patented method of dynamic range expansion or Lectrosonics on their patented method of a Digital Hybrid Wireless Compander system. If Jac is going to vilify Zaxcom (An american company) he needs to also include these companies as well as all others who invent and pioneer at great cost.  

We remain ready and willing to receive a communication from Jac that explains this device so that a determination can be made. There may not be any be any issue at all with him selling his product in the USA. Unfortunatly we do not know that and he has not been at all been willing to communicate the necessary information with us via Email.

 

Glenn Sanders

President Zaxcom Inc.

 

 

[Olle Sjostrom]

Interesting. New thread? Maybe new section... Manufacturers and dealers discussing patents!

Skickat från min E5823 via Tapatalk

[RadoStefanov]

Interesting. New thread? Maybe new section... Manufacturers and dealers discussing patents!

 

Skickat från min E5823 via Tapatalk

 

 

+1

This IMHO should not cloud a topic that talks about the SX-R4+

It is as if same to say "I'm living in Europe, I don't really care about Zaxcom - Sonosax patent war in the other side of planet".

Not really. I just don't care about analog micpres and "special" analog front ends and converters.   The analog pres on my nomad are on a shelf collecting dust.

Edited November 10, 2015 by RadoStefanov

[Jeff Wexler]

+1

This IMHO should not cloud a topic that talks about the SX-R4+

Not really. I just don't care about analog micpres and "special" analog front ends and converters.   The analog pres on my nomad are on a shelf collecting dust.

I have asked several times to stop all the mudslinging and questions, comments, on this PATENT topic --- this topic should be about the new recorder from Sonosax as the title suggestes. Discussions of legality, morality, innovation, patents, etc. should be posted HERE

[RadoStefanov]

I have asked several times to stop all the mudslinging and questions, comments, on this PATENT topic --- this topic should be about the new recorder from Sonosax as the title suggestes. Discussions of legality, morality, innovation, patents, etc. should be posted HERE

Totally agree.

Thanks Jeff.

[Glen Trew]

For what it's worth, the only "pony in the race" I have is to make sure Trew Audio customers have good information and choices in equipment. I have been involved in discussions with all parties concerned about this matter since the beginning. Whether or not the threat of a law suit was direct, I don't know, but it was clearly implied. I'm not saying it was right or wrong, good or bad; only that it was, in deed, the reason our customers in the US lost an equipment option that could have been a valid choice.

[drpro]

As a very famous duo said in one of their songs "whine, whine, twang, twang

[Jeff Wexler]

For what it's worth, the only "pony in the race" I have is to make sure Trew Audio customers have good information and choices in equipment. I have been involved in discussions with all parties concerned about this matter since the beginning. Whether or not the threat of a law suit was direct, I don't know, but it was clearly implied. I'm not saying it was right or wrong, good or bad; only that it was, in deed, the reason our customers in the US lost an equipment option that could have been a valid choice.

Replying to Glen Trew's post can be found HERE. Trying to keep the Sonosax thread about the Sonosax SX-R4+ recorder, not all the rest of the stuff being discussed here.

[Jeremiah Sheets]

I'd love to hear more from anyone getting their hands on the unit. It fits the bill for me as a very small (Maxx sized) unit that can expand to 16 channels. I was looking at keeping the Maxx for bag and utilizing the 970/QL1 for cart, but this is an interesting option for a more portable cart setup. (I'd still likely utilize a 970 and QL1 for a bigger cart since I'm a big mixer board kinda guy.)

Edited November 11, 2015 by Jeremiah Sheets

[Richard Thomas]

I'd love to hear more from anyone getting their hands on the unit. It fits the bill for me as a very small (Maxx sized) unit that can expand to 16 channels. I was looking at keeping the Maxx for bag and utilizing the 970/QL1 for cart, but this is an interesting option for a more portable cart setup. (I'd still likely utilize a 970 and QL1 for a bigger cart since I'm a big mixer board kinda guy.)

I put up an 'early days' review a while back but it'll be buried under patent stuff.

http://rtsound.net/?p=444

I think one of the unfortunate results of this is that Sonosax have had to spend time modifying the machine to make a US version, which could have been spent getting the firmware up to spec and getting the additional hardware finished

Edited November 11, 2015 by Richard Thomas

[Jeff Wexler]

I think one of the unfortunate results of this is that Sonosax have had to spend time modifying the machine to make a US version, which could have been spent getting the firmware up to spec and getting the additional hardware finished

Or, Sonosax could have spent a few minutes or a day discussing this with Zaxcom and possibly settled the whole issue right there and then. Now, moving on, thank you Ricahrd and Jeremiah for trying to get this topic back on track. I personally think the SX-R4+ is a great machine and I really enjoyed playing with it at NAB. It does seem to be still a work in progress as many of these new things tend to be (we've all gotten used to the world of software driven devices by now). I look forward to getting my hands on the US model (which incidentally I believe has excellent mic preamps and more than adequate dynamic range, matching or exceeding the many of the other recorders in use). I don't think anyone should consider the US model an inferior product.

[soundtrane]

Or, Sonosax could have spent a few minutes or a day discussing this with Zaxcom and possibly settled the whole issue right there and then. 

Probably for a license that costs a lot of money Jeff... maybe they felt it was not viable?  

Sonosax have had to spend time modifying the machine to make a US version, which could have been spent getting the firmware up to spec and getting the additional hardware finished

I'd like to think maybe Sonosax is going to look at their market acceptance and then work towards what is important first - the US market or the rest of the world. 

[Jeff Wexler]

Probably for a license that costs a lot of money Jeff... maybe they felt it was not viable?  

 

I did not imply that the issue would necessarily involve a license fee --- that is only one of the possible outcomes. If the Sonosax technology does not infringe on Zaxcom's patent, Sonosax is doing their own thing and it is different, then the issue is settled and development and worldwide shipment of the recorder can proceed without any problems. 

[Erkal Taskin]

US version or not, I think its still a superior machine which can stand out without needing to rely on fancy gimmicks, as some others do...

 

[daniel]

Or, Sonosax could have spent a few minutes or a day discussing this with Zaxcom and possibly settled the whole issue right there and then. Now, moving on, thank you Ricahrd and Jeremiah for trying to get this topic back on track. I personally think the SX-R4+ is a great machine and I really enjoyed playing with it at NAB. It does seem to be still a work in progress as many of these new things tend to be (we've all gotten used to the world of software driven devices by now). I look forward to getting my hands on the US model (which incidentally I believe has excellent mic preamps and more than adequate dynamic range, matching or exceeding the many of the other recorders in use). I don't think anyone should consider the US model an inferior product.

From what i've read, it seems Sonosax asked for a face to face verbal discussion, Zaxcom wanted an email 'meeting' with everything in black and white. 1 of these options creates a litigious atmosphere, the other option suggests a desire for a gentlemanly sounding out.