My thoughts on Schoeps CMD42 and why Zaxcom Nova “oneunit” is too heavy! (:

[RadoStefanov]

My thoughts on Schoeps CMD42 and why Zaxcom Nova “oneunit” is too heavy! 🙂

 

  

I am very excited about the Schoeps CMD42 AES42 digital amp. I have been using schoeps exclusively for 6+. Ever since my sennheiser MZD8000 digital AES42 amp died.

I was using a digital mic preamp for a long time as well before my MZD8000 died.

There is multiple advantages of using AES42.

In my opinion the sooner the signal chain becomes digital the better for the sound quality and reliability. Aes42 is IMHO the right approach.

No need for analog cable runs ,analog front end pres and Analog to digital converter. No more power and RF interference, buzz, crackle, ground loops. 21st century insulation. No more analog artifacts.

A lot of my work is multiple setup interviews in Las vegas hotels. It is one hotel room for multiple setups/angles. You setup one, do the interview and than move around the cameras and light for every other user. Using a wireless for boom speeds up the setup and avoid power lines and potential interference.

It also sounded a lot more defined. Using digital wireless from a digital microphone kept me for worrying about potential problems.

Working in sports arenas is similar.

The only point of failure in a pure AES42 microphone is the capsule and the millimeter behind it. Everything else is 100% .

  

The CMD42 is a great tool.

Apart from all the advantages of AES42 mentioned above “, superior shielding, reliability and sound quality” the CMD42 has the  flexibility of  2 independent channels and most importantly  variable Low Cut and pad.

I like the pad to also be at the mic capsule and not at the analog front end of the recorder. In fact I want everything to happen right next to the capsule and than flow digitally out of there… There are special digital filters for different capsules. Filters for low frequency loss in directional capsules.The filters for  close proximity comb filtering  turn the capsules in to P “proximity capsules”. For free. Freaking amazing. There are filters for OMNI and Ribbon “which I will never use” but the filter for parabolic dish seams promising. And I can only assume what the capsule correction for capsules with memory does for us… Capsules with memory????

 

I was  purchasing a cut60 but it was out of stock. I got lucky. Now the money can be used towards a CMD42 giving me “Cell Phone controllable” variable low cut/pad and filters. Considering how expansive SCHOEPS accessories are the CMD42 gives me over a thousand dollars in accessories and thousands of dollars in proximity P capsule filters.

  

Now about the potential advantages with recorders…….

Back in the day I removed the analog preamps “among other things”  from Nomad to make space for the mix pre II antenna distribution, internal battery and to make the recorder lighter, simpler  and have permanent RF,power and AES3 connections.  OneUnit design. No more cables failures and interference.  The buster father of Zaxcom Nova OneUnit.

The only reason I was able to achieve that is using mkh8040 and mkh8060 microphones with the AES42 directly in to Nomad.

Eliminating the ancient analog front end and AD converters simplifies the design and cuts a lot of the cost and weight. Also analog front ends fail and get out of calibration.

AES42 is  superior. Far superior.

  

Now we have CMD42 and Zaxcom can make a simple/lighter recorder “like my Nomad one Unit” by removing all analog front end limiting the outputs to 2 simple channels outs TA5 and  2 simple analog mic/line ins TA5 inputs for the rare times i need to feed something in analog.

Why?????  Better reliability, lower power usage and lighter weight. Also cost is cheaper.

Yes Nova Oneunit is too heavy! 🙂

It has 4 more mic pres than what I need. and 6 more power outputs.

Make it simpler and lighter.

Call it Zaxcom Nova lite.

My back is too tired wearing 5 pounds all in one unit bags. I want 4 pounds. 🙂

 

[The Documentary Sound Guy]

I disagree heartily.  Not to say that digital mics don't have a place, but you are writing as though the digital parts of the signal never fail.  You aren't making the system less complex.  You are simply moving the complexity into the microphones and requiring a whole bunch of functionality to be duplicated in every microphone instead of implementing it once in the recorder.  That has pros and cons, and your post only really lists the pros.

Pros:

• Shorter analogue path means less susceptibility to analogue distortions.
• Duplication of input signal circuitry provides redundancy:  If it fails, only one microphone has failed, not the recorder.
• Less analogue circuitry in the recorder means less weight and power consumption in the recorder.

Cons:

• Removes compatibility with analogue microphones and other devices and / or requires outboard pre-amps and A/D converters for every analogue device I need.
• Increases weight and power consumption in every microphone (meaning:  a heavier boom and way less battery life for the boom Tx).
• Makes troubleshooting slower and more difficult because now there are more places where settings can be misconfigured, and more points of failure in the microphone.
• Using a wireless Tx for the boom introduces all the reliability issues of a wireless transmitter ... sure it's digital, but that doesn't avoid interference, drop-outs and battery issues.
• Longer digital path means more ways for digital transmission to go wrong.

Practically speaking your approach locks you into a single microphone vendor.  Schoeps is great, but it's not the correct choice in every situation.  I want to be able to use specialized instrument mics, hydrophones, geophones, exotic pre-amps, and all the $100K+ of analogue accessories in my existing sound kit.  I want to know I can easily patch into a house sound system, or plug in a microphone that someone has handed me as their "favourite mic".
 

The CMD42 requires an order of magnitude more power than a phantom microphone.  That means worse battery management for boom transmitters, or a significant increase in recorder power consumption if hardwired.  I get less than 2 hours of runtime on my TRX745 when powering my AES42 SuperCMIT.  That can work for a dramatic show where I have a boom op to baby-sit it, but it wouldn't work for long interviews.  Your approach doesn't reduce power consumption for the whole system, it just moves it around.

In my opinion, focussing on gear and signal-chain as a path to better audio only goes so far.  In day-to-day operation, simplicity, resistance to user error, and ease-of-workflow have a greater effect on audio quality than keeping the analogue path as short as possible.  The change you are suggesting trades workflow advantages for signal-chain advantages that are mostly minor or theoretical.

These are the workflow disadvantages that I see:

• Eliminating analogue inputs hugely restricts my workflow by limiting which tools I can use.  Access to the right tool for the situation is hugely important for keeping workflows simple.
• Pushing input processing into the microphone means I no longer have instant access to those settings in the recorder.  I can't instantly see what settings are enabled, and to change them, I have to pull out a phone and get physically close to the mic (because settings are changed by dweedle tones).  Yes, there are circumstances where the input processing really does need to be very early in the chain, but 95% of the time it doesn't matter and its easier, quicker, and more reliable to make the change at the recorder.
• Using a boom transmitter means another devices to manage batteries for, and the high power consumption of the CMD42 means I need to track this fairly closely.  I can't just change batteries once a day at lunch.

I can see a place for a recorder with all-digital inputs for simple jobs (say, an interview kit) where I could bring a single-purpose kit and know that the job will fit within the confines of that single purpose.  But it couldn't be my only recorder ... I need a recorder with analogue inputs for a general purpose kit because of the flexibility it gives me.

Maybe that will change in the future.  If enough other manufacturers adopt digital, I'd feel less need to rely on analogue gear.  If the recorder (in conjunction with the boom Tx) implements the AES control protocols well enough that I don't need to whip out my phone to adjust settings in the microphone, that would address my concern about putting those settings there.  Maybe other manufacturers will produce digital PSUs that are less power hungry and the concerns about battery life go away.

But right now, with the equipment and workflows that are available, I see far more downsides than upsides.

[RadoStefanov]

     YES - The complexity is custom part designed and matched by Schoeps. A custom designed and very simple matched front end with custom designed pads in analog domain and sets of digital filter also custom designed for that capsule is so much more superior from whatever some company does later in a recorder. RF shielding is designed on the spot and eliminates points of failures down the line. It is not even close. Also the digital microphone can record the raw dynamic range. 

 

your cons:

Your first one it is not mentioned because it is a logical common sense one. Yes there is no compatibility with analog mics and if you like your mkh50 or cmit5 the AES42 is not for you. I will not  use mics that are pure analog. So for me it does not matter.

 

The CMD42 is 10grams heavier. Spoke to Philippe at Cinela. He said it makes absolutely no difference. As far as power I have not experienced such a difference in power consumption when using the MKH8xxxx analog or with MZD8000. Maybe your wireless transmitter is not very power efficient. On nomad my power consumption went down a lot when I eliminated the 6 XLR pres and the 4 XLR output modules.

 

Absolutely does not make trouble shooting slower. For 95% of my jobs it’s set it and forget it. It’s stays in the mic and nothing can change it. Unless the recorder is MODE 2 nothing can change the microphone settings. And the fact that it is digital from the head down the line makes troubleshooting easy. At least for me. One of the main reason I like it is because it is not going through analog amps cable RF filters and bunch of other things that are not necessary.

 

It absolutely eliminates interference… Doing everything in the microphone allows for superior RF shielding. Talk to Schoeps about it.That level of RF shielding can only be done with quick conversion to digital and eliminating all analog problem prone components down the line.. You can also send it down a 984 feet AES3 cable and have zero issues. AES signal is thousand times less prone to interference. 

Work disadvantages you mention.

 

I mentioned above that I will not use the analog tools that are not compatible with the digital mics. Common sense. But I rather simplify my workflow. Not crazy about many tools. Happy with my existing choices. I can use a new supercmit based on the newer digital amp design.

100% agree with your point.  You can not change the processing while rolling. But I am willing to sacrifice that for all the flexibility. I can probably adjust it in 5 seconds when we  cut. You can still apply extra processing in the digital domain.

Using a wireless transmitter is a must for most of my work. Are you powering your TRX745 with AA? I stop using AA for TRX74x 10 years ago.  I use different size Ltypes based on my needs.  

Also don’t forget that AES42 can carry 2 microphones 2 signals.. 

 

Yes I see way more upsides than downsides.

 

Correction.
AES can go interference free for guaranteed 984 feet over generators and power lines.

[The Documentary Sound Guy]

Details on the CMD42 power consumption from here:  https://schoeps.de/en/knowledge/manual/cmd-42.html
 

Quote

The CMD consumes much more power than an analog microphone (1-2 Watts).

The actual specs say 120mA @ 10V, which is 1.2W.

Compare that to the CMC6:  4mA @ 48V (0.192W) or 8mA @ 12V (0.096W).

I can't speak for the discontinued Sennheiser or Neumann amps, but this additional power consumption is in line with my experience with the SuperCMIT, which also consumes a large amount of power.

Speaking of the SuperCMIT, it definitely does not eliminate the chance of RF interference.  I get a 2KHz tone in the noise floor when the TRX745 is too close (and this is true even though I use a filtered input cable).  The RF gets into the analogue stage before conversion to digital.  By contrast, RF bleed into my StarQuad analogue cables is simply not a problem that shows up.  I know it's theoretically possible, but in the <10m cable runs that are all I commonly use, it's simply not an issue.

43 minutes ago, RadoStefanov said:

The CMD42 is 10grams heavier.

 Heavier than what?  And does that include the added weight of your L-Series batteries?

[RadoStefanov]

1 hour ago, The Documentary Sound Guy said:

Details on the CMD42 power consumption from here:  https://schoeps.de/en/knowledge/manual/cmd-42.html
 

The actual specs say 120mA @ 10V, which is 1.2W.

Compare that to the CMC6:  4mA @ 48V (0.192W) or 8mA @ 12V (0.096W).

I can't speak for the discontinued Sennheiser or Neumann amps, but this additional power consumption is in line with my experience with the SuperCMIT, which also consumes a large amount of power.

Speaking of the SuperCMIT, it definitely does not eliminate the chance of RF interference.  I get a 2KHz tone in the noise floor when the TRX745 is too close (and this is true even though I use a filtered input cable).  The RF gets into the analogue stage before conversion to digital.  By contrast, RF bleed into my StarQuad analogue cables is simply not a problem that shows up.  I know it's theoretically possible, but in the <10m cable runs that are all I commonly use, it's simply not an issue.

 Heavier than what?  And does that include the added weight of your L-Series batteries?

Before testing the power consumption I can not comment. I had no issues with mzd8000. 

But now think about something else. How much power do the mic press and converters use in your recorder without even being used.

You can eliminate all extra circuits and power use. 

On paper 10V phantom uses 3 times less power than 48V.  Interesting to measure the real time power consumption.

 

SuperCMit is old tech. The zaxnet 2khz you get is from the capsule not the analog front end end converters. Update your schoeps capsules. I just did on my minicmit and tested with zaxnet source. Not a problem. 

Also supercmit had a self noise issue that i did not like. 

When I talk about weight I only care and I am talking about mounts and handling.  You can always put it at the end of the poll. I know a a couple of  super star boom ops put counter weight on the end of the poll. 

Also I have been begging Zaxcom to make another Boom Op transceiver like 942.  That can move a lot of it on the waist.

 

Unfortunately TRX74x is a power hog. 

 

 

 

Remember how cool this was?

[The Documentary Sound Guy]

1 hour ago, RadoStefanov said:

But now think about something else. How much power do the mic press and converters use in your recorder without even being used.

You can eliminate all extra circuits and power use. 

On paper 10V phantom uses 3 times less power than 48V.

Which paper?  The numbers I cited from Schoeps directly contradict this.  But yes, it would be worth measuring in actual use.

And, yes, I realize that the analogue circuitry in the Nova consumes power ... this is why I said your plan was shifting power consumption, not reducing it.  In theory at least, they can be turned off (though I think that option doesn't do anything at the moment).

 

1 hour ago, RadoStefanov said:

SuperCMit is old tech. The zaxnet 2khz you get is from the capsule not the analog front end end converters. Update your schoeps capsules.

Unfortunately, Schoeps doesn't offer the new capsule for the SuperCMIT.  I asked.  So, old tech or not, the only digital shotgun mic that I'm aware of has some issues ... I think it has its place, but it's not something I want to use as my daily mic.  Do you imagine not using a shotgun mic at all in your setup?  Which shotgun are you planning to use?

[RadoStefanov]

32 minutes ago, The Documentary Sound Guy said:

Which paper?  The numbers I cited from Schoeps directly contradict this.  But yes, it would be worth measuring in actual use.

And, yes, I realize that the analogue circuitry in the Nova consumes power ... this is why I said your plan was shifting power consumption, not reducing it.  In theory at least, they can be turned off (though I think that option doesn't do anything at the moment).

 

Unfortunately, Schoeps doesn't offer the new capsule for the SuperCMIT.  I asked.  So, old tech or not, the only digital shotgun mic that I'm aware of has some issues ... I think it has its place, but it's not something I want to use as my daily mic.  Do you imagine not using a shotgun mic at all in your setup?  Which shotgun are you planning to use?

One of my main reasons I can convert to 100% digital is I really don’t like cmit5 or mini cmit. 

They sound bad indoors. Mk41 sound great indoors and outdoors. for my work sticking to mk41 only is great. 

Even with the little louder ambient level mk41 sounds a lot better. Ambient levels don’t mean anything now in the era of Izotope RX advance.

I am making a fabric cosi with removable short fur for quick indoors outdoors work. Philippe was kind enough to send me bunch of furs and parts to try to achieve that. 

[The Documentary Sound Guy]

I agree, I don't like the CMIT (or any shotgun) indoors.  SuperCMIT sounds even worse.

I guess if you are willing to forego using any shotgun mics, your plan makes more sense.  That's not a limitation I'd consider ... I need the additional reach of a shotgun mic in outdoor situations.

[RadoStefanov]

13 minutes ago, The Documentary Sound Guy said:

I agree, I don't like the CMIT (or any shotgun) indoors.  SuperCMIT sounds even worse.

I guess if you are willing to forego using any shotgun mics, your plan makes more sense.  That's not a limitation I'd consider ... I need the additional reach of a shotgun mic in outdoor situations.

I am hoping the low frequency equalization can assist in reach. Also as I said in the world of IZOTOPE RX and other AI tools the ambient of axis level is not as important as before. Even before RX I liked a a mk41 with higher off axis level than any other mic “mkh50 for example” with less off axis level. I have never had to go for MKH70 or other long interference tubes but the CMD42 has a parabolic filter for use with parabolic dishes. 

The proximity filters that deal with comb filtering are promising as well.

 

I think there are a lot of convenience advancement and flexibility in one microphone.  Don’t really want to have all my mics with me all the time. 

ALSO THE AMP IS FIRMWARE AND SOFTWARE UPGRADABLE. 🙂

 

[VASI]

I think it is important to separate what type of projects someone is doing, before we start to analyse the pros and cons for CMD 42 and recorders in general. Is it reality? Is it feature film? Is it documentary? Is it field - atmos? As Schoeps wroted - said; CMD 42 is not meant to replace something of what we know (and use).

 

In my world, which is feature films and television drama; the POV is about dynamics and the handle of it. Is about "matching" the frame correctly. Ironically, the industry has been pushed - forced; the production sound dept. to run everything wireless; so mic preamps make less sense (in recorder) and as back-up feature. And here comes about "dynamics", and the problem with current workflow; where you have to manage the distance of the mic position (aka the boom operator), the mic preamp of transmitter, the trim and finally the fader (which end in director headphones or to the person which pays you).

 

Word: "Breath". The main advance of cable from boom to recorder with mic preamp is one: Mic can "breath", Production Sound Mixer can handle the dynamics much more better. As Jeff Wexler said before, here, many years ago; the trim and fader becomes - act as first stage of compression. Now the "trim" has been far away from mixer hands and live in a boompole (eg. transmitter). The feeling of touching the trim and reaction, has been eliminated (in some way). Form of Art the PSM work; which nowdays is more about logistics aka "do you have 16 wireless and wire them all without a reason; because maybe will have a line, maybe not; just for sure; we don't know" without knowing the departments outside from PSD (Production Sound Department) why we will need a wireless lavalier even without spoken dialogue. And everybody knows - feel what I am talking about "dynamics" during a scene and what's the cost of: 1. Boom hardwired to recorder. 2. Wireless Boom - Managing multiple "steps". Even if you are a Boom Operator.

 

So, the question to me is: Can the CMD 42 deliver the same sense of dynamics, minus dealing with the "compression" because from soft to loud (and vice versa) is a thing which the post production deal (with speakers, not headphones; in theatre) and hear our mistakes (aka mic position - mic preamp setup in Tx - trim and fader position) in such scenes / frame; where two (or three) persons "dancing" (aka PSM & Boom Operator -s)? Pretty sure, Simon Hayes can speak about it; since it was a beta tester; if it's still here.

[RadoStefanov]

55 minutes ago, VASI said:

I think it is important to separate what type of projects someone is doing, before we start to analyse the pros and cons for CMD 42 and recorders in general. Is it reality? Is it feature film? Is it documentary? Is it field - atmos? As Schoeps wroted - said; CMD 42 is not meant to replace something of what we know (and use).

 

In my world, which is feature films and television drama; the POV is about dynamics and the handle of it. Is about "matching" the frame correctly. Ironically, the industry has been pushed - forced; the production sound dept. to run everything wireless; so mic preamps make less sense (in recorder) and as back-up feature. And here comes about "dynamics", and the problem with current workflow; where you have to manage the distance of the mic position (aka the boom operator), the mic preamp of transmitter, the trim and finally the fader (which end in director headphones or to the person which pays you).

 

Word: "Breath". The main advance of cable from boom to recorder with mic preamp is one: Mic can "breath", Production Sound Mixer can handle the dynamics much more better. As Jeff Wexler said before, here, many years ago; the trim and fader becomes - act as first stage of compression. Now the "trim" has been far away from mixer hands and live in a boompole (eg. transmitter). The feeling of touching the trim and reaction, has been eliminated (in some way). Form of Art the PSM work; which nowdays is more about logistics aka "do you have 16 wireless and wire them all without a reason; because maybe will have a line, maybe not; just for sure; we don't know" without knowing the departments outside from PSD (Production Sound Department) why we will need a wireless lavalier even without spoken dialogue. And everybody knows - feel what I am talking about "dynamics" during a scene and what's the cost of: 1. Boom hardwired to recorder. 2. Wireless Boom - Managing multiple "steps". Even if you are a Boom Operator.

 

So, the question to me is: Can the CMD 42 deliver the same sense of dynamics, minus dealing with the "compression" because from soft to loud (and vice versa) is a thing which the post production deal (with speakers, not headphones; in theatre) and hear our mistakes (aka mic position - mic preamp setup in Tx - trim and fader position) in such scenes / frame; where two (or three) persons "dancing" (aka PSM & Boom Operator -s)? Pretty sure, Simon Hayes can speak about it; since it was a beta tester; if it's still here.

 

Very quickly.  The cmd42 will deliver the most dynamic range and sound quality compared to any other combinations. 
when I used mzd8000 my mkh8040s and mkh8060 sounded noticibly better going digital. 

I don’t know what Schoeps said about it. This will replace my cmc6.  
Ans if you like a wired booms the cmd42 is your best choice. Goes to 1000 feet interference trouble free on a cable. Guaranteed 964 feet. 

 

[Fred Salles]

I am impatient to hear how does it sound and curious to hear if mini preamp and converter embedded in a mike body would sound better or as good as those in our high range recorders. 
Though I am pretty optimistic that it could be better for wireless boom with any tx that accept aes input I wonder if it would be the case for lets say a Sonosax preamp+converter. 
 

As per the mod2 features of AES42, Like low cut filters, I do not yet understand the benefits over those of the recorders since they will be applied in the digital domain, unlike a CUT1 that is applied before mike preamp and makes more sense preventing preamp or converter saturation. 

[RadoStefanov]

20 minutes ago, Fred Salles said:

I am impatient to hear how does it sound and curious to hear if mini preamp and converter embedded in a mike body would sound better or as good as those in our high range recorders. 
Though I am pretty optimistic that it could be better for wireless boom with any tx that accept aes input I wonder if it would be the case for lets say a Sonosax preamp+converter. 
 

As per the mod2 features of AES42, Like low cut filters, I do not yet understand the benefits over those of the recorders since they will be applied in the digital domain, unlike a CUT1 that is applied before mike preamp and makes more sense preventing preamp or converter saturation. 

The AD analog pad and digital filters are designed for the the schoeps capsules by schoeps. Huge advantage. The conversion is 100% perfect. 

The filters are custom designed by schoeps to work with schoeps capsules. Actually they are custom for each capsules. Also there was an easter egg in the manual about capsules with memory. Huge potential.   

 

Don’t worry about the low cut being in a digital domain. The analog front end/AD converter  freq response  is 8 Hz - 96 kHz. It also captures the full dynamic range. of the capsule regardless of digital gain. In fact the ideal use will be recording both the RAW signal and the digital gain adjusted one. 

 

 

 

On 4/21/2024 at 5:43 PM, The Documentary Sound Guy said:

 

It seams the power is 120 mA at 10 V “AES42 phantom voltage”.

[The Documentary Sound Guy]

7 hours ago, RadoStefanov said:

It seams the power is 120 mA at 10 V “AES42 phantom voltage”.

Yup.  And the CMC6 is 4mA @ 48V.  Which is 6.25x less power than AES42, not 3x more.  Like I said, analogue phantom uses way less power.

[RadoStefanov]

16 minutes ago, The Documentary Sound Guy said:

Yup.  And the CMC6 is 4mA @ 48V.  Which is 6.25x less power than AES42, not 3x more.  Like I said, analogue phantom uses way less power.

It does. But digital does not use that much more. And the extra power is worth it for all the advantages…

It does not matter going in to a recorder. Let’s wait for real world test on a wireless.

[The Documentary Sound Guy]

1 minute ago, RadoStefanov said:

It does. But digital does not use that much more.

Maybe "digital" doesn't, but the CMD42 does.  The CMD42 manual specifically warns about it, and the published specs reflect that.  As does my experience with the SuperCMIT ... it cuts battery life on the TRX745 by a bit more than a third.  As for whether it's worth it ... that's subjective ... I don't think it is.

And I think it does matter in the recorder.  Zaxcom specs the Nova at 1A @ 12V with 8 channels of Rx, which is 12W.  The MRX414 modules each consume 300mA @ 13V, or 3.9W each.  That means the recorder itself consumes 12 - (2 x 3.9) = 4.2W on its own.  That means a CMD42 will increase the power consumption of the Nova by almost 30%, whereas a CMC6 will increase it by less than 5%.

I agree, let's wait for real world performance tests, but, on paper, the CMD42 will noticeably decrease battery life however it is powered.

[RadoStefanov]

2 hours ago, The Documentary Sound Guy said:

Maybe "digital" doesn't, but the CMD42 does.  The CMD42 manual specifically warns about it, and the published specs reflect that.  As does my experience with the SuperCMIT ... it cuts battery life on the TRX745 by a bit more than a third.  As for whether it's worth it ... that's subjective ... I don't think it is.

And I think it does matter in the recorder.  Zaxcom specs the Nova at 1A @ 12V with 8 channels of Rx, which is 12W.  The MRX414 modules each consume 300mA @ 13V, or 3.9W each.  That means the recorder itself consumes 12 - (2 x 3.9) = 4.2W on its own.  That means a CMD42 will increase the power consumption of the Nova by almost 30%, whereas a CMC6 will increase it by less than 5%.

I agree, let's wait for real world performance tests, but, on paper, the CMD42 will noticeably decrease battery life however it is powered.

Your numbers are off judging by the mzd8000 experience. 
it’s true I removed the 6 micpre converters from nomad but I did not loose any noticeable power.
let’s wait and see. 
third of the power from using aes42 seams a crazy. Judging by mzd8000 again 
 

by the way I believe supercmit uses more power.

Are you using trx745 with AA???

[The Documentary Sound Guy]

2 hours ago, RadoStefanov said:

Your numbers are off judging by the mzd8000 experience.

My numbers come directly from Schoeps and Zaxcom, because that is the equipment you say you want to use.  Why are you so hung up on the MZD8000?  If you want to use that ... buy a used one and do it that way.  But don't equate it to the CMD42, which has published specs.

Yes, SuperCMIT uses more power.  170mA according to Schoeps.  It has a second capsule and a whole bunch more DSP, so no surprise there.  And the MZD8000 is rated at 160mA, so on paper the CMD42 will be better than both.  But all three are power hogs compared to analogue.

Yes, I'm using AAs with the 745.  So what?  Battery life will be drop commensurately no matter how it is powered.

[RadoStefanov]

let’s wait and see. I am skeptical about specs and actual numbers.  

745 has better battery life than my 743 but still nowhere near what it is needed in my workflow. . As I mentioned I power with Sony Ltype Lithium.  When I used mzd8000 with 8040 and 8060 I never cared about the battery power. Usually with medium battery. 
 

[Patrick Tresch]

On 4/21/2024 at 7:11 AM, RadoStefanov said:

My thoughts on Schoeps CMD42 and why Zaxcom Nova “oneunit” is too heavy! 🙂

 

  

I am very excited about the Schoeps CMD42 AES42 digital amp. I have been using schoeps exclusively for 6+. Ever since my sennheiser MZD8000 digital AES42 amp died.

I was using a digital mic preamp for a long time as well before my MZD8000 died.

There is multiple advantages of using AES42.

In my opinion the sooner the signal chain becomes digital the better for the sound quality and reliability. Aes42 is IMHO the right approach.

No need for analog cable runs ,analog front end pres and Analog to digital converter. No more power and RF interference, buzz, crackle, ground loops. 21st century insulation. No more analog artifacts.

A lot of my work is multiple setup interviews in Las vegas hotels. It is one hotel room for multiple setups/angles. You setup one, do the interview and than move around the cameras and light for every other user. Using a wireless for boom speeds up the setup and avoid power lines and potential interference.

It also sounded a lot more defined. Using digital wireless from a digital microphone kept me for worrying about potential problems.

Working in sports arenas is similar.

The only point of failure in a pure AES42 microphone is the capsule and the millimeter behind it. Everything else is 100% .

  

The CMD42 is a great tool.

Apart from all the advantages of AES42 mentioned above “, superior shielding, reliability and sound quality” the CMD42 has the  flexibility of  2 independent channels and most importantly  variable Low Cut and pad.

I like the pad to also be at the mic capsule and not at the analog front end of the recorder. In fact I want everything to happen right next to the capsule and than flow digitally out of there… There are special digital filters for different capsules. Filters for low frequency loss in directional capsules.The filters for  close proximity comb filtering  turn the capsules in to P “proximity capsules”. For free. Freaking amazing. There are filters for OMNI and Ribbon “which I will never use” but the filter for parabolic dish seams promising. And I can only assume what the capsule correction for capsules with memory does for us… Capsules with memory????

 

I was  purchasing a cut60 but it was out of stock. I got lucky. Now the money can be used towards a CMD42 giving me “Cell Phone controllable” variable low cut/pad and filters. Considering how expansive SCHOEPS accessories are the CMD42 gives me over a thousand dollars in accessories and thousands of dollars in proximity P capsule filters.

  

Now about the potential advantages with recorders…….

Back in the day I removed the analog preamps “among other things”  from Nomad to make space for the mix pre II antenna distribution, internal battery and to make the recorder lighter, simpler  and have permanent RF,power and AES3 connections.  OneUnit design. No more cables failures and interference.  The buster father of Zaxcom Nova OneUnit.

The only reason I was able to achieve that is using mkh8040 and mkh8060 microphones with the AES42 directly in to Nomad.

Eliminating the ancient analog front end and AD converters simplifies the design and cuts a lot of the cost and weight. Also analog front ends fail and get out of calibration.

AES42 is  superior. Far superior.

  

Now we have CMD42 and Zaxcom can make a simple/lighter recorder “like my Nomad one Unit” by removing all analog front end limiting the outputs to 2 simple channels outs TA5 and  2 simple analog mic/line ins TA5 inputs for the rare times i need to feed something in analog.

Why?????  Better reliability, lower power usage and lighter weight. Also cost is cheaper.

Yes Nova Oneunit is too heavy! 🙂

It has 4 more mic pres than what I need. and 6 more power outputs.

Make it simpler and lighter.

Call it Zaxcom Nova lite.

My back is too tired wearing 5 pounds all in one unit bags. I want 4 pounds. 🙂

 

If I understand the problem you have with your recorder, buy a lighter and better one
(wich also accept AES42  inputs). 
 

A downside of AES 42 is also that it eats up  2 AES INPUTS. 

[RadoStefanov]

On 4/25/2024 at 10:58 AM, Patrick Tresch said:

If I understand the problem you have with your recorder, buy a lighter and better one
(wich also accept AES42  inputs). 
 

A downside of AES 42 is also that it eats up  2 AES INPUTS. 

🙂

Is there a lighter and better one than Zaxcom Nova OneUnit?

I want zaxcom to make a lighter one.

I have plenty of AES inputs