Nomad as a mixer....

[Jack Norflus]

With so many of the tweaks under both menu control and multiple function knobs, has anyone who has used the Nomad primarily as a mixer found themselves wishing they had their Sound Devices strapped on instead during any particularly hot and heavy R-N-G assaults?

Under harried conditions, do you find reconfiguring easy or is it a function better left to a less pressured prep time?

The short answer is no - I don't wish for a simpler mixer.

My previous mixer was a Cooper CS-104. The 104 is a great mixer and it served me well for quite a few years and I would consider it the polar opposite of the Nomad in terms of menus and functions. The 104 has a switch for each operating parameter and a few internal mechanical jumpers. So interns of a plain mixer you can't get any more basic. Given that making the transition from the CS-104 to a Nomad has been quite easy.

While Nomad has multiple menu options - once you get the machine set up the way you like there is not a whole lot of changes necessary while in the thick of it. The only real on the fly adjustments that will need to be made in a mix only situation is panning, trim and fader levels and possibly headphone selection - all of which are done right from the home screen and with knobs and buttons that are easily accessible - so there is no need to get into the menus while the bullets are flying.

And as several users have posted here - when you get yourself familiar with the menu structure it becomes second nature to make changes on the fly.

[studiomprd]

" a decision between adding a 744t to my bag - along with my mixer - or to make the jump to using a Nomad by itself. "

with more specific information comes more specific, possibly even more helpful answers...

first, may I still mention, this will be your personal choice, many factors are subjective,

Are you able to set something up with your favorite "suspect"? One is reasonably close, and the drive might be an excellent investment -- demo's are why dealers are keeping one in stock is there a chance of a rental or trial ?? :

What is your mixer now? ...and what about $$$

[dominiquegreffard]

If you re doing a lot of standing-up R-n-G bag work i suggest avoiding a mixer and recorder combo such as 744t + 552. Your back will thank you i promess

[old school]

The Nomad is very light.

CrewC

[saadasound]

I've been told that the SD 552 and 744t give you a lot more options than the nomad. Is this true?

[Jeff Wexler]

I've been told that the SD 552 and 744t give you a lot more options than the nomad. Is this true?

Whoever said that knows nothing about Nomad (or SD 552 or SD 744T). The 552 is a 2-track recorder, the 744T is a 4-track recorder with no mixing, how could that combination give you more "options". The only "option" one could possibly argue is that if you have 2 devices (a 552 and a 744T) and one goes down, you will still be able to do something I guess. Nomad, in 1 box, provides about 10 times the options, features and functions compared to a 552 and a 744T.

[Jack Norflus]

I've been told that the SD 552 and 744t give you a lot more options than the nomad. Is this true?

What options? Can you be more specific?

[RadoStefanov]

BTW you can mix on 744t the same way you mix on the nomad by routing input to output.

788t has an advantage over Nomad - WIFI mixing and mixing accessories - the cl8 and cl9. Not a big deal for me.

552 has one advantage over Nomad...variable pan and low cut knobs. - Not a big deal for everybody but music trackers.

Nomad beats every product on the market by having so many options - iso recording, Time code, Soon IFB.

And the number one reason why NOMAD is awesome is Zaxcom nailed the price.

What options? Can you be more specific?

Whoever said that knows nothing about Nomad (or SD 552 or SD 744T). The 552 is a 2-track recorder, the 744T is a 4-track recorder with no mixing, how could that combination give you more "options". The only "option" one could possibly argue is that if you have 2 devices (a 552 and a 744T) and one goes down, you will still be able to do something I guess. Nomad, in 1 box, provides about 10 times the options, features and functions compared to a 552 and a 744T.

[Jack Norflus]

BTW you can mix on 744t the same way you mix on the nomad by routing input to output.

I'm not quite sure I agree with this statement.

While yes you can output audio from the 744 but it can't really substitute as a full time mixer for many reasons, but mostly because there are no faders.

In terms of using Nomad as a mixer vs a 744, or even a 552 - Nomad has more inputs and has way more output routing flexibility than both of these machines together. Nomad also has multiple output busses that can be used to create separate independent mixes, if necessary. Nomad also has great input, output and card limiters and compressors. Nomad also has six mic pre's, notch filters, variable high pass filters, and programmable delay for each of the main inputs. Multiple metering options and and flexible HP routing.

788t has an advantage over Nomad - WIFI mixing and mixing accessories - the cl8 and cl9.

Nomad has the mix 8

552 has one advantage over Nomad...variable pan and low cut knobs.

How often does anyone actually need a variable pan? Nomad has variable low cut filters.

Nomad beats every product on the market by having so many options - iso recording, Time code, Soon IFB.

And the number one reason why NOMAD is awesome is Zaxcom nailed the price.

Agreed - plus full Zaxnet control including IFB and TC transmission, Auto-mix, Never-clip, USB recording (Nomad 8, or 12 only), light weight and low power consumption. Plus Nomad runs cold with no real noticeable RF spray.

[afewmoreyears]

............ Mummmm crunch, crunch , crunch....... More action, please.....

[Jack Norflus]

Does it? I thought you said in an earlier post that this feature has not yet been implemented.

Correct - it has not been implemented yet.

[ncsoundmixer]

A few notes on my three weeks of use with the Nomad.

I'll begin by saying my 442/744t rig is long gone. That's proof enough that I was willing to make the transition.

Now, back to the Nomad.

Yes, a few times during the first few shoots with Nomad I got lost in "menu hell" and wanted to roll into a little ball and cry myself to sleep. The same thing happened with my 744t four years ago - but the Nomad is more complex and its software is less mature at this point than the 744t's.

Nomad has made some compromises for low weight and compact dimensions that I would not have made if I had designed the product or if I had been involved with consulting on its design:

1. No dedicated hard button prefades on the Nomad. The operator has to activate the prefade mode button and then activate the desired prefade input button, which is not a "momentary" switch. The prefade stays active until another button is pushed.

The 442 (552 as well) has prefade momentary switches right next to the faders. I can find the 442 prefades in the dark, with one hand. Every time. I would often "spring" back and forth with the 442 prefades during takes in order to isolate each source depending on who was talking or what was going on in the scene. The Nomad has to be PFL'd in a more deliberate manner.

2. No dedicated record and other transport controls on the Nomad. Instead we get "shifted" and "unshifted" functioning of 6 buttons that can do two (or more) things (such as act as prefade or transport controls) depending on their switch states and how many times the button may be pressed, and for varying durations of button press. There is a learning curve with this style of operation. I could find the REC button on the 744t in the dark, every time, and it only did one thing - start the recording.

Numbers 1 and 2 above seemed like deal breakers when I first got the machine. I am not bothered as much now that I'm more comfortable with Nomad operation though I would still prefer dedicated controls.

3. Lots and lots of menu driven configuring for recording, input set up, routing, and monitoring. This actually becomes a plus - and one of the most powerful ones - once you gain proficiency - but in the beginning the Nomad is the opposite of an intuitive hard button basic mixer like the 442 (of course, the 442 is a much simpler device).

4. Nomad easily wins the weight and size game, being about 1.5 pounds lighter than a 442 alone and essentially the same size. (Nomad is 3.6 pounds and the 442 is 5 pounds. 744t is 3.6 pounds.) The issue here is that if the Nomad had been a half inch or so taller on it face, it likely could have had dedicated hard button prefades and transport controls - and probably still wouldn't have weighed more than a 442. (Even it weighed as much as a 442, the Nomad wins because it's has far more input and output capacity as a mixer AND is also a recorder)

So negatives first, now positives:

1. Less weight. My bag is 8 pounds lighter with Nomad replacing the 442, 744t, and connecting cables. That's a huge difference - I went from 23 to 15 pounds - the bag is around 1/3 lighter with double the input and recording capability. The direct out cables used with 442/744t set ups are another thing that adds weight to the 442/744t pairing.

2. More capability. The routing flexibility is light years ahead of a 442/744t. Matrix routing means you don't have to constantly repatch sources and outputs to realize different configurations. The Nomad can record ISO's (4-12 tracks, depending on model) to internal card tracks, send a two track mix to a camera, send a separate and unique mix to video village, send another separate and unique mix to the director's headsets, and yet another mix to transcription, and still have capacity left over. I now spend much less time dealing with patching in and out cables, splitters, and other junk. The Nomad has far more mixing and routing capability than the Sound Devices mixers. No contest. Not even close.

3. Less junk. My bag is much less crowded and I have half as many cables running through the bag connecting stuff together. Nomad delivers a much more streamlined hardware set up. I don't have to deal with a modular system like a 442/744t system where I might decide to just go with the 442 and no 744t for ENG type jobs. That involved unpatching the 744t and pulling the unused stuff out of the bag to save weight and simplify. With Nomad I have full capability in one box. I don't have to re-rig the recorder for any shoot - I just add or subtract wireless systems as needed.

Change is one of the hardest things to do, but we have to change in order to grow. That's why I went with Nomad. It's great as a mixer. And as a recorder. And as both. Anytime, every time.

[Jeff New Jersey]

Maybe its just me but I use the quick variable pan almost everytime I use more then 2 mics and I am doing a doc, news, or anything unscripted and am only recording to the 2 channels on camera. When things are not rehearsed and you are making decisions as they happen a quick variable pan is quite desireable. example last job----history channel show--director says "dont know what we are exactly about to shoot, or how we are going to shoot it, but we have one chance to get it, so you need to use your best judgement and make it work. As we were getting ready for the shot to happen with 3 wireless in my bag and both hands over my head holding a 12 foot boom pole......I 100% thought this situation is going to be more of a dance on a nomad. Sure someone might say, well now with the nomad all the channels are isos so who needs the pan.......Well there are tons of jobs that dont want double system. I make a nice living doing many of them.....and a pan control adjusted with two fingers that you almost dont even have to look at to find is lovely.

I am pretty sure I am going to get a nomad, but I find it difficult imagining it will be the right tool for every job.

And I find it silly if anyone says it will do every type of job better then a sd setup.

I imagine I will be using both a nomad with a 442/552 at times, and sometimes just a nomad....

I welcome the nomad, as I welcome Sd to make us something new...... (

[Philip Perkins]

A few notes on my three weeks of use with the Nomad.

I'll begin by saying my 442/744t rig is long gone. That's proof enough that I was willing to make the transition.

Now, back to the Nomad.

Yes, a few times during the first few shoots with Nomad I got lost in "menu hell" and wanted to roll into a little ball and cry myself to sleep. The same thing happened with my 744t four years ago - but the Nomad is more complex and its software is less mature at this point than the 744t's.

Nomad has made some compromises for low weight and compact dimensions that I would not have made if I had designed the product or if I had been involved with consulting on its design:

1. No hard button prefades on the Nomad. The 442 (552 as well) has them right next to the faders. I can find the 442 prefades in the dark, with one hand. Every time. I would often "spring" back and forth with the 442 prefades during takes in order to isolate each source depending on who was talking or what was going on in the scene. The Nomad has to be PFL'd in a more deliberate manner.

2. No dedicated record and other transport controls on the Nomad. Instead we get "shifted" and "unshifted" functioning of 6 buttons that can do two (or more) things (such as act as prefade or transport controls) depending on their switch states and how many times the button may be pressed, and for varying durations of button press. There is a learning curve with this style of operation. I could find the REC button on the 744t in the dark, every time, and it only did one thing - start the recording.

Numbers 1 and 2 above seemed like deal breakers when I first got the machine. I am not bothered as much now that I'm more comfortable with Nomad operation though I would still prefer dedicated controls.

3. Lots and lots of menu driven configuring for recording, input set up, routing, and monitoring. This actually becomes a plus - and one of the most powerful ones - once you gain proficiency - but in the beginning the Nomad is the opposite of an intuitive hard button basic mixer like the 442 (of course, the 442 is a much simpler device).

4. Nomad easily wins the weight and size game, being about 1.5 pounds lighter than a 442 alone and essentially the same size. (Nomad is 3.6 pounds and the 442 is 5 pounds. 744t is 3.6 pounds.) The issue here is that if the Nomad had been a half inch or so taller on it face, it likely could have had dedicated hard button prefades and transport controls - and probably still wouldn't have weighed more than a 442. (Even it weighed as much as a 442, the Nomad wins because it's has far more input and output capacity as a mixer AND is also a recorder)

So negatives first, now positives:

1. Less weight. My bag is 8 pounds lighter with Nomad replacing the 442, 744t, and connecting cables. That's a huge difference - I went from 23 to 15 pounds - the bag is around 1/3 lighter with double the input and recording capability. The direct out cables used with 442/744t set ups are another thing that adds weight to the 442/744t pairing.

2. More capability. The routing flexibility is light years ahead of a 442/744t. Matrix routing means you don't have to constantly repatch sources and outputs to realize different configurations. The Nomad can record ISO's (4-12 tracks, depending on model) to internal card tracks, send a two track mix to a camera, send a separate and unique mix to video village, send another separate and unique mix to the director's headsets, and yet another mix to transcription, and still have capacity left over. I now spend much less time dealing with patching in and out cables, splitters, and other junk. The Nomad has far more mixing and routing capability than the Sound Devices mixers. No contest. Not even close.

3. Less junk. My bag is much less crowded and I have half as many cables running through the bag connecting stuff together. Nomad delivers a much more streamlined hardware set up. I don't have to deal with a modular system like a 442/744t system where I might decide to just go with the 442 and no 744t for ENG type jobs. That involved unpatching the 744t and pulling the unused stuff out of the bag to save weight and simplify. With Nomad I have full capability in one box. I don't have to re-rig the recorder for any shoot - I just add or subtract wireless systems as needed.

Change is one of the hardest things to do, but we have to change in order to grow. That's why I went with Nomad. It's great as a mixer. And as a recorder. And as both. Anytime, every time.

Excellent review and thanks. The weight and reduced cablage are powerful factors for sure.

phil p

[Jack Norflus]

Maybe its just me but I use the quick variable pan almost everytime I use more then 2 mics and I am doing a doc, news, or anything unscripted and am only recording to the 2 channels on camera. When things are not rehearsed and you are making decisions as they happen a quick variable pan is quite desirable.

Jeff,

I think you are misunderstanding. Variable pan's are ones that aren't limited to "hard panning" meaning that they aren't restricted to just left, right and center. Variable pans pots will allow you to pan microphones somewhere between left and center or center and right. Nomad has "hard panning" meaning in "two channel ENG mode" you can pan a microphone to either left, right, or center. So when I was asking who needs variable panning - I was asking who need to do pan other than "hard panning".

[Jack Norflus]

I imagine I will be using both a nomad with a 442/552 at times, and sometimes just a nomad....

Why would you use a Nomad with a 442 or 552?

Everything those machines can do - Nomad can do as well. And there no need to carry the extra weight.

[John Blankenship]

Why would you use a Nomad with a 442 or 552?

Everything those machines can do - Nomad can do as well. And there no need to carry the extra weight.

I don't think he meant he intended to use them at the same time. I think he meant to have them both and use whichever system he considered the best tool for the job. Choosing the best tool for a given job, of course, is part of what makes us pros. Naturally, not everyone will agree on what that toolset is.

[John Blankenship]

Just to play advocate here, I think the only fair comparison is what the Nomad actually does now (which is still quite impressive) compared to the competition.

According to my dealer, Zaxcom won't guarantee to them that all the features will be implemented, therefore the dealer won't offer such a guarantee to their customers. I'm not knocking Zaxcom in saying this (I own and happily use Zaxcom equipment along with that from Sound Devices, Lectrosonics, and many other manufacturers). It would seem that buyers might be better served by choosing based on what "is" not on what "might be."

[jason porter]

I do see some potential issues concerning the lack of a dedicated pan switch, I can find and pan an input on my 302 with my eyes closed. Can the same be done with the Nomad? (hopefully!) That being said, I rarely need to do live pans (hard or variable) and with the ISO tracks, I would feel even better about not needing to. Of course, this is my opinion, concerning the jobs I do.

I would like to see a remote roll, either as an app or a dedicated hardware switch.

[glenn]

All of the announced features of Nomad will be implemented.

Glenn Sanders

President Zaxcom Inc.

[glenn]

Nomad supports remote roll with a dedicated contact closure.

Glenn

[glenn]

"And I find it silly if anyone says it will do every type of job better then a sd setup."

Since the ultimate job is to mix and record audio I believe that the Nomad is the best solution.

I am of course very biased but my belief is that "never clip" with its 135 dB dynamic range input and the soft knee compressors with look ahead provide a level of audio quality and transparency that is not equaled or exceeded by any product.

There are of course many other factors to look at and Nomad was designed to exceed the capabilities of all existing product offerings at a lower price point. Nomad is not a contest between us and any other company. It is a personal challange to provide a product that exceeds the expectations of our customers on multiple levels and to raise the bar for all who follow.

Glenn

[Mike Matthews]

Wow. What a great topic. Drama, passion, entertainment, strong opinions, and great information. Thanks to all, I learned a lot and really appreciate it.

[soundslikejustin]

Does it? I thought you said in an earlier post that this feature has not yet been implemented.

It also (as yet) does not have Zaxnet, AutoMix etc. Planned but not implemented into software yet.

[RadoStefanov]

You caught me. (:

Yes I overstated the mixing capabilities of 744t,

Had no Idea Mix8 works with Nomad. Sorry I must have missed it.

But everything else we agree.

And the lack of RF spray "or the lack of reports on RF spray from Nomad as of yet" is a very important point I missed.

I'm not quite sure I agree with this statement.

While yes you can output audio from the 744 but it can't really substitute as a full time mixer for many reasons, but mostly because there are no faders.

In terms of using Nomad as a mixer vs a 744, or even a 552 - Nomad has more inputs and has way more output routing flexibility than both of these machines together. Nomad also has multiple output busses that can be used to create separate independent mixes, if necessary. Nomad also has great input, output and card limiters and compressors. Nomad also has six mic pre's, notch filters, variable high pass filters, and programmable delay for each of the main inputs. Multiple metering options and and flexible HP routing.

Nomad has the mix 8

How often does anyone actually need a variable pan? Nomad has variable low cut filters.

Agreed - plus full Zaxnet control including IFB and TC transmission, Auto-mix, Never-clip, USB recording (Nomad 8, or 12 only), light weight and low power consumption. Plus Nomad runs cold with no real noticeable RF spray.