Old vs new recorders & boom Sanken css-5 help

[Goonie]

Hey everyone!

 

I am new to the game, so forgive me if this seems obvious. Is the 552 unpractical and dated as a stand-alone mixer/recorder if I can get my hands on one for $600? and I am deliberating over whether or not the sd552 would make sense or if I should get the the mixpre 6 ii or the zoom f8n pro. Which one will have a better shelf life for expansion as a student such as myself. 
 

On a separate note. I have acquired a ktek Avalon graphite traveler that is cabled with a 3pin xlr, however, I have a sanken css-5 shotgun mic that runs a 5pin. I was thinking about picking up the Rycote cyclone and windjammer, but figured I would ask you all what solutions you might have for using it on a boom or how you run your css5.

 

does anyone know if the connbox on the css5 specific Rycote cyclone blimp splits to two 3 pins or uses a 5pin? My brain is fried. Thanks!

[Tim Norris]

The 552 was a game changer if you needed a high quality left/right MP3 mix for transcription, or as a back-up to the files recorded to a video camera. This was wonderful for electronic news gathering. If you need to deliver primary audio files, a different recorder may be in order. I was able to sell my 552 for quite a bit more than I paid for it. It is still useful.

 

I am not happy with how the MixPre series machines handle output to other devices... but I do News stuff.  I prefer to strap on the 30+ pound 688/SL6 rig in hurricanes, floods and boom interviews walking in parades over my much lighter MixPre-10 ll and MixPre-6 ll bags. I have never considered a Zoom device.

 

I've been required to use a stereo shotgun on a boom only once in nearly 40 years of recording sound. It was for a PBS documentary captured in ENG style, very on the fly. The stereo shotgun was a stupid idea... I believe an external cable was used. I can't imagine my primary/only 'shotgun' being stereo.

 

I am certain you can make any combination of these things work for you.

 

Cheers,

Tim

[JonG]

Ask yourself what your needs are, then read the manuals of the machines you mentioned, and decide which one is best for you. 

[Goonie]

3 hours ago, Tim Norris said:

The stereo shotgun was a stupid idea... I believe an external cable was used. I can't imagine my primary/only 'shotgun' being stereo.

*gulps. Nervous laugh* 😂 Yeah, I guess it can seem a little unpractical..I uh..well, I got a helluva deal on my CSS5 ($450), so, it will be my primary for now and  hopefully it’s 3 shooting modes (mono, normal, wide) can cover my bases until I get my workflow dialed in. Sounds like an uphill battle though..😅😂

[Philip Perkins]

The 552 is a great sounding unit, and I personally still prefer the Sound Devices preamps in it (with Lundahl transformers) to those in their later equipment, especially for musical instruments.  A 552 can record but is very limited as a recorder compared to other, later devices and it really requires that you learn well how it operates, since it has very little in the way of visual indicators and follows a logic of its own.  Its recorder isn't on the level of other SD machines in terms of sync stability and TC operations, and is stereo only in any case.  I still use a 552 for its preamps, but never try to record on its onboard recorder any more.  If you need a portable, "wearable", small recorder for doing sync location dialog recording I'd recommend looking at something else.  Most newbies I know of go with either a Zoom F-series machine or an SD Mix-Pre series recorder.

[Paul F]

Put that CSS-5 on ebay and buy another microphone. You should be able to make a tidy profit from what I see on past sales.  If you get a good price, you should be able to break even on getting a used Sennheiser MKH-416. Then you will have your first acquisition towards a nice collection of microphones.

 

 

[IronFilm]

I started out with a Sound Devices 552 / Tascam DR680mk1 combo, which for its era (the pre-F8 era) was a fantastic low budget starter kit. 

 

But then, sometime later, when the Zoom F4 was announced I got that almost immediately (I never got the original F8, as I had some hesistation over it initially, due to the very very terrible reputation Zoom had at the time. And deservedly so, as their H Series was awful! But the Zoom F Series is so radically different, that I believe they should have launched it under a different brand name).

 

That Zoom F4 was a huge upgrade for me, I never looked back. 

 

For 99% of people, then the Sound Devices 552 in 2022 would be a poor choice to buy (even at $600) vs the alternatives. 

 

Hands down I'd prefer the Zoom F8n instead by a massive margin. (I'd prefer it over the MixPre6 too, it simply is overall a better designed recorder/mixer. In terms of I/O + ergonomics + app + reliability + ambisonics + features + control surface + etc etc)

[Paul F]

One note to Iron's comments regarding the F8n; consider the F8 with the software upgrade to save yourself a couple hundred bucks. The F8n has some important improvements, but maybe they are not important to you. Here is a comparison chart from Zoom to see what it's missing.

 

https://zoomcorp.com/media/documents/F8n_vs_F8_ComparisonChart_2.pdf

 

 

[IronFilm]

Indeed, the initial F8n had quite a few nice upgrades over the F8 originally, but the firmware updates for the F8 later on closed that gap a lot. 

 

However, switchable line/mic inputs for the F8n (got to use a 1/4" connector if feeding line level to the original F8) and pro line level output for the F8n (vs consumer line level on the F8) are good enough reasons in my opinion to pay the marginal extra cost of a secondhand F8n vs F8. (plus other very small improvements, such as the F8n supplying power over USB to the F Control)

[Eric]

I can't imagine not having the option of recording discrete iso tracks today. A 552 can record two (L&R).

I did own a 552 and sold it for a 664.

I have never been asked or had use for a stereo microphone in all my years of doc/reality. No time to do ambience recording. It's all been run and gun, interviews, and verite.