Tascam HD P2 vs MarantzPDM 671

GrowLLLTigeRRR said:
I'm reading right here that the

Tascam HD-P2 samples at 44.1kHz -192kHz with a resolution of 16 or 24 bits

while the

Marantz PMD-671 samples at 16 kHz to 48 kHz with a resolution of 32-384 bits!!!

So what's better; higher sampling frequency or increased resolution (more bits)?


I'm just a poor public school biology teacher who wants to capture human voice, birdsongs, and frog calls.

Any assistance with this decision will be greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure you have a couple of misconceptions there... if not then I'd love to be corrected by Oleg or somebody else qualified.

As I understand it... the DV review of the HD-P2 means to say that the HD-P2 can record in 24bit, and that many other prosumer recorders can easily record in 16bit... and that the gains in using the HD-P2 to record 24bit are negligible versus simply using the HD-P2 to record in 16bit like you would do with a lesser recorder. The comments about the field recording "not justifying the extra media" mean to imply that a 6db gain in recording at 24bit really won't be noticeable versus recording in 16bit. At the time they wrote this article a 2gb card was considered pretty big, and 4-8gb cards were quite expensive... so the comments about extra media refer to this issue. While they point out that recorders like the Sound Devices achieve 112db dynamic range... the 96db dynamic range isn't really being looked down upon. I read it that they are complimenting this machine AT THE PRICE versus getting top specs for way way more, when in the world of video the differences will be marginally audible.

If you read that review again I think you'll see that they're giving a glowing review to the HD-P2... and that it's being pretty highly recommended.

Since I just sold my 671 to get an HD-P2 I gotta' check your comments about the 671... but I'm guessing that is a point of confusion and that you're actually looking at mp3 compression schemes instead of bits. The 671 and HD-P2 are both 16-24bit machines, but the 671 sampling ends at 96khz versus the HD-P2 which will go to 192khz. Check me if I'm wrong.

Again... time-code factors are a big deal for a video guy... or they will be eventually. I loved the sound of my 671, but I opted for the HD-P2 just to get, at the minimum, a "loose" referrence to TC abilities. On some gigs I'm pretty sure I'll be genuinely jammed... but on others I can still hit the TC button in close sync and maintain that easily recognized shift until a battery change. I just completed a 5 week long gig where we were supposed to run my eng bag directly into the camera, and within the first couple of days they saw the 671 and wanted to make things easy on themselves... so they just told me to "go mobile" the entire time. I feel sorry for the editor, because he'll have to work through sound notes on the script... where I'm stating good TRACKS on the 671 as they link to slated takes... but I'd have preferred to simply have matching (or nearly matching) time code at the proper frame rate... which the HD-P2 can do. Sounds simple, no?
 
Last edited:
Matt is correct, you are confusing bit rate with bit depth. The high numbers you quote are bit rate, a number that compressed audio formats like MP3 use. The choice between the two (Tascam and Marantz) have mostly to do with what you are recording and personal taste. I have the 671 and like it very much, but if I were doing a lot of production I would probably choose the Tascam - it wasn't available when I bought and I do very little production recording. Personally I like the UI of the 671, but I haven't really played with the HD-P2. If I were buying today and the price was about the same I would probably go with the Tascam. First because Tascam, though not fantastic, has better user support. Marantz is really a consumer company and doesn't send out things like firmware updates, so what you buy is pretty much what you get. I'm happy with it but it would make me feel cozier if I knew that if some big incompatibility came up that I had a fighting chance of getting a fix. Second would be the TC functions. Way down the list would be higher sample rate. I don't use the 96 rate except on very rare occasions. Though I am hearing that it's more common now to do FX recordings at 192 as a sort of future proofing. This is probably stupid in that I doubt that most of the recorders and chains used today are giving you much worth while up there but??? If high sample rates is your thing then I would look at the new KORG single bit recorders. They are in the same price range as what we have been talking about and are reported to sound unbelievable. Production recording however is not at 192 and probably never will be (a prediction I'm sure to eat), or at least it will probably never make sense to be at 192.

So if your doing production I think the choice is clear, if your recording FX then the choices are wider that these two at this price range. Sonically I think there isn't much difference. Both will sound MUCH better than DAT.
 
I sold my 671 with a 4gb Kingston CF card for $500... I would not recommend you buy a new 671. Sonically they may be hard to distinguish, but to give you an idea of what TC ability is worth; an SD 702 is $1875... and the 702T is $625 more... the 702T might jam to another device (TC out?) whereas the HD-P2 will not... but still, the fact that the HD-P2 will accept and run TC is a big deal. If it weren't I wouldn't have sold my 671 for less then half of what I paid for it.

One thing that I really admire in the Sound Devices recorder is the setting at 48.048 for sampling frequency. If you're shooting at 24p, which is actually 23.976 (or whatever) then the reason to record at 48.048 is because when you drop your audio in the timeline it will be slowed down by .01%... so the extra .048 compensates for this... on most scenes it will be impossible to detect, but on a long scene this sync issue may present itself... it would probably take a really long scene to do it... so I wouldn't worry about this if you're using a 671 (maybe 10 minutes or more uncut?)... but anyway, since the HD-P2 can be SET to 23.976 frame rate @ 48khz... I'm pretty sure this is a non-issue... at least that's what I thought when I gave my credit card number :cheesy:.

Don't get me wrong... I loved my 671 and I think they sound great... but for a videographer there's no point in discussing these two machines together AT THE SAME PRICE.

I might have to turn this into another me66 thing... it took a long time to get this momentum in favor of the 4073a... now on the forum if anybody asks about an me66 everybody automatically says "WHOA! Stop right there! For just a little more money you can get a much better mic!" Keep in mind that I had an me66 early on... so anyway... my point is that if you own a 671 then it's time to sell it... make somebody's day by giving them a really great deal on your machine. That's what I did... I worked on a project with a great kid who really wanted to buy as much of my gear as I'd sell to him... so I sold him a bunch of stuff really cheap. Find that kid in your area and give him that 671 and replace it with a HD-P2.

For everybody else... if the original poster is asking about new versus new on these machines... at similar prices... then it's not a tough choice. I'm one of the few who bought a 671 only about 2 months before the HD-P2 came out... ouch!... but there's no denying it... if you check my history you'll see that I aknowledged this right away... you gotta' go HD-P2 unless you can get a bargain buy on the 671.
 
Last edited:
Matt,
We probably bought the 671's at the same time. Mine came in at 850 new so I must have gotten lucky.

Two points. First the .01% is not for 23.xx It's for shooting at film speed and going to video speed. So the very few cameras that shoot true 24 frame video or folks shooting in 35 or super 16 and then going to video post. A very useful feature but not so much if your strictly video. Also it is not a small thing. Your dialog will be noticeably out of sync by the end of just about any take. You will drift out of sync by about 1.5 frames per minute. The easy fix is to have all tracks speed changed either in or before telicine, or work on a system that allows for pulldown of the audio. Don't know if FCP does but Avid (pricier versions) does.

Second is as I was saying I'm doing FX recording and have no use for TC so I won't be selling my 671 anytime soon. If I do I will likely go to the KORG and that is also a non TC box. I have boom Recorder and that is what I will be using for things like production if it's not over the shoulder.

Other wise I completely agree with you. If your doing production then the Tascam is the choice.
 
I'd stay away from Marantz. The Tascam HD-P2 has superior preamps, better specs (192kHz, wordlock I/O, SPDIF I/O to name a few), a more intuitive menu system, and of course the ability to accept incoming SMPTE time code. i don't feel the Marantz compares in these areas.

that said, there's a couple cons to the HD-P2 worth pointing out: first, the timecode is a little iffy and certainly drifts. i've compared it side-by-side to a SD744 and while the 744 was still basically perfect frame-for-frame after 7 hrs, the HD-P2 had drifted substantially. suffice to say the HD-P2 does not use crystal based TC like Ambient's (which SD licensed for their recorders). the second con to the HD-P2 is it does not have much headroom on the preamps, though they do sound clean. i plugged in a Beyerdynamic M58, MCE58, and Sennheiser MD46 and all three required near-maximum input gain. i prefer having a little extra wiggle room, so i'd feel more comfortable putting a SD MixPre in front of this.
 
Now lets be fair here, I don't think you are talking from personal experience in all of this. The 671 has SPDIF I/O, 192 is not particularly an issue since if your doing production your not recording at 192 and if your recording FX you don't need TC, and I haven't heard anything to convince me that the preamps are any better. I have heard both argued, and personaly I use the MixPre as a front end so it's never worried me much. But I did do a series of tests because of the bad rep the 670 pres had and I found the 671's to be very decent and not much below the MixPre's. I use the MixPre mostly because of it's other features.
Again I am pretty much agreeing with the Tascam. If I were buying now I would probably go with the Tascam. For FX I think its pretty much a tossup but for production Tascam has the clear lead. Neither is a SD, Nagra or Deva challenger.
 
There's nothing wrong with the 671... I hope I didn't give that impression... I was simply saying in a "both machines are $1K" shopping cart... I'd go Tascam.

Wow I'm amazed at how easily these conversations can get "flamey".
 
Last edited:
If your looking to do FX and Ambient recording then look at the HDP2 from Oade Brothers with their super mod upgrade. I went this route and am very happy. Its $1299 with the upgrade but I think its worth it to get much better pre amps and an extra 6DB of gain. This can help in video and with certain mikes. I looked at ten different recorders and would love to have a SD 744 but the price was too stiff for my budget so I settled on the P2 with the super mod and feel I got a great machine. Good luck.
 
Matt,

I agree with your assessment and I would also, probably. Guess I was getting a little defensive. I found a number of places selling the 671 for $850 and I got my local pro audio place to match that. I haven't seen the Tascam go that low. But I was able to see the Tascam work today (on Phil's cart) and even if the Tascam was $150 over the 671, I would lean heavily toward the Tascam. I just think the big part of the choice (for me anyway) comes down to a few features. TC even if its limited, and better support. That's why for me, I wouldn't get rid of the 671, but if I bought today I would probably go Tascam. And for me personally it's balanced out a bit by some rather poor quality issues with Tascam equipment I have used or own. I have yet to meet anyone who had a trouble free relationship with the DAP1 and I own a DA78. The DA78 had a problem with there outputs feeding impedance balanced inputs (all Mackie mixers) that Tascam fixed sort of by sending to those who knew to ask a single space box full of I assume output transformers that you pluged between the DA78 and the mixer. And it has a battery problem, the five year life of the big pain to replace internal battery ends up being about 6mo. The fix for that was they sent extra batteries. So while I have had great times with some other products, I sort of want to see how any new Tascam product holds up after a year. Of course to be fair I had a recurring clutch problem with my Marantz field cassette recorder, so???
 
Hey Noiz, no offense taken, i like these talks! I apologize if my opinion sounded a bit strong, but it's just the result of testing all these products week after week, I tend to get pretty picky about what I like and don't. as I'm sure you do :) Now i just want to respond to a few quips...

Noiz2 said:
The 671 has SPDIF I/O
Click to expand...

my mistake. just a testament to how many of them we see around town (just kidding, I like to speak too soon sometimes).

192 is not particularly an issue since if your doing production your not recording at 192 and if your recording FX you don't need TC
Click to expand...
sure but why not have a machine that can do both? (i'm just playing devil's advocate here - i know you like the HDP2 - but it's a valid question for those considering either device)

and I haven't heard anything to convince me that the preamps are any better.
Click to expand...
I just compared the two again after revisiting this thread, and maybe i'm hearing things, but i hear a cleaner gain on the Tascam. i'm using Ultrasone PROLine 550's to monitor and a Schoeps CMIT 5U for source. i'm not going to spend too much more time on comparisons but i'm standing by my initial and secondary tests.

For FX I think its pretty much a tossup but for production Tascam has the clear lead. Neither is a SD, Nagra or Deva challenger.
Click to expand...
agreed 100% there. for FX, you have a much wider variety of things to use anyways - very few can handle multi-track production and FX well. i'm anticipating that Sonosax's new recorder will be a major player in that market when it's released later this year. playing with their newer SX-ST and internal digital recorders, i have to admit that they have a new convert.
 
Agreed, given a choice with everything else equal I would take the 192 over the 96. It would be pretty low on my needs list and probably lower if I was doing mostly production. The one little reason that 192 might figure in is that IF it can do a clean 192 the converters and preamps MIGHT be better. And to that point I have not A/B'd the Tascam and PMD671 so I am not speaking from hard experience, just reflecting what I have heard. Since you have A/B'd them you are probably right. I'm also using the 671 with a MixPre so my actual experience with the 671's pre's is limited to testing that I did when I got it.
Things that might be better on the Tascam that would be a significant factor for me would be really good limiters, good roll off's. If these were on a par with the MixPre then that could be a reason to switch machines. Both of those features on the 671 are near useless and VERY important for FX work.

Now your going to tell me that both are GREAT on the Tascam and I'm going to have to start saving my money... ;~)
 
Well... my HD-P2 arrived last night and it certainly doesn't LOOK as nice as the 671 did. Another pet peeve is MOLDED, PROTRUDING FEET on the bottom of the unit! So much for the perfect appearance of my Petrol ENG bag! The Peg-Z1 was practically MADE for a 302 and 671... it was a perfect fit.

The protruding LCD on the HD-P2 was expected... and interferes as I knew it would... the little feet on the bottom aren't a big deal... but annoying never the less. On the Marants the little feet were stick on only... and once removed the unit slipped into the Petrol with the greatest of ease.

So far no big deal... but if you think the 671 felt "plasticy" then you're not going to be impressed with the appearance of the HD-P2.

Of course I didn't buy this thing for it's looks ;-)

I think if time code wasn't a consideration that I would have bought one of the newer Korg recorders. Those little guys make me drool... but TC was my only reason in parting with the 671 anyway. If I post some of my most recent audio using the 671 via 302 down in OKC I think you'll agree that the 671 does a virtually PERFECT recording... even at 16/48.
 
yeah, the HD-P2 isn't exactly a tank, build-wise. just like the Edirol recorders, it leaves a bit to be desired in the durability department. but it really is a strong machine as I'm sure you'll realize over time.

the Kork MR-1 is my new favorite digital recorder, i was really really impressed by the intuitive and responsive interface. i wish more recorders had menu systems like that (but as any fellow electronic musician tell you, that's par for the course for Korg). i am still a bit skeptical about how 1 Bit recording will factor into future audio formats, but it's refreshing to see a new spin on it.
 
Noiz2 said:
Things that might be better on the Tascam that would be a significant factor for me would be really good limiters, good roll off's. If these were on a par with the MixPre then that could be a reason to switch machines. Both of those features on the 671 are near useless and VERY important for FX work.

Now your going to tell me that both are GREAT on the Tascam and I'm going to have to start saving my money... ;~)
Click to expand...

No, i won't tell you that because it's not true ;) Really, I'd only trust Cooper, Sonosax and Sound Devices when it comes to usable limiters, gain staging and roll off's (in this industry at least). For portable gigs, I would always recommend putting a 302 or 442 in front of a recorder - even a 744!
 
I used a 302 in front of my 671 and it will be the same for the HDP2... while I'm not blown away by the look and feel of the Tascam... there's no denying some VERY cool, yet understated things.

For one, on the 671 you have tracks ONLY... that's it... all the other notation is up to you. The HDP2 will accept Jammed TC via an XLR in... OR it will accept TC input from a video BNC... that's pretty cool. Another option for simple file retrieval in the edit is to use the internal clock and you'll be pretty darn close, if not absolutely frame accurate.

FINALLY... if all that isn't enough... the unit has an internal clock... which automatically TIME STAMPS the beginning of each file. So even if you use no time code, but set your cam to free run time code for time of day... you STILL have a pretty easy means to locate individual tracks and mate them with the video based on recorded and saved information apart from the clapper.

Much like modern SLRs will put meta-data on each picture, the HDP2 will stamp each file.

Needless to say I find this very cool... and as I'm playing around with it I'm discovering even more cool things that it will do... I'll let you know more about this unit as I figure it out for myself.

EDIT: Oh yeah... one of my pet peeves with the 671 is that it gives you a virtually worthless warning that the batteries are going to die... by the time you see the screen flashing you HARDLY have time to save your current track... and guess what... if you DON'T save it... then it's GONE. All it takes to save it is push stop... so you're a fool if you lose it... but the issue is that if you don't SEE this happening in time... the file is gone.

The HDP2 will automatically stop recording and save the file if the batteries are dying... while this doesn't really MEAN that much to me since I use an IDX system with BDS in a bag... this USED to be an issue for me. I wouldn't have even mentioned it but then I noticed the volt meter on the display of the HDP2 and I remembered the days when that would have been REALLY handy on the 671!

As I said, now it's a total non-issue... but for a lot of people this could be a really important and valuable feature.
 
Last edited:
Another day... another couple of cool discoveries on the HD-P2.

Project Settings.

The HD-P2 has project settings and the machine stores individual projects. This is like the audio version of scene files in your DVX.

In the 671 you have to set bit depth and sample rate, as well as recording format... and then go with that until you want to change it. This is fairly simple and not that big of a deal, but there isn't much information shown in the display about where everything is set. On the HD-P2 you can set up individual projects... like say you want to record your dialog at 16/48 to make it drop right in with your video (and suppose you run TC at 23.976 also)... well that can all be Proj 001... then while set at that, every take under Proj 001 is in order and conforms to that format.

Okay but lets say you decide that while you're in this area you want some foley or sound effect at 24/96 or higher? You can have a Proj 002 with the proper settings ready to go... and after the shoot wraps... or on break or whatever... you can dial over to Proj 002 and you'll be recording everything as you predetermined for these files. To top it off you can NAME each project whatever you want... it doesn't have to be "Proj".

Oh yeah... the "retake" key is very easy and convenient also... this is a fast way to dump the last track and have the unit ready to pickup at that take number or timecode as if the track never happened... to the joy of editors around the world.
 
MattinSTL said:
On the HD-P2 you can set up individual projects... like say you want to record your dialog at 16/48 to make it drop right in with your video (and suppose you run TC at 23.976 also)... well that can all be Proj 001... then while set at that, every take under Proj 001 is in order and conforms to that format.
Click to expand...
I agree this comes in extremely handy. You can also save these project settings as project templates. So when you create a new project you just use one of these templates and you're ready to rock and roll, in an instant. Very cool stuff.
 
That's what I meant in comparing the project settings to scene files in the DVX or HVX.

Yes... this way... you don't set individual parameters like you do in the 671... you can just set any project number in an instant... and you will automatically have bit depth, sample rate, frame rate, time code... all set automatically. Yes, that IS nice.

Another minor thing... but one that I'm impressed with... is FIREWIRE instead of USB... this means 400mbps transfers... which basically negates the need to EVER remove the card! Nice. Also... the unit will run POWER through the firewire... meaning that you can plug the unit into your computer to transfer files and it will run off the power coming down the firewire cable. For a guy like me who will NEVER have batteries installed in the unit this is pretty cool... I can pop the HD-P2 out of my eng bag... where it has power via power distribution in the bag... and then connect to my computer... all the while NOT having to use the wall-wort OR install batteries! Very nice.

While I think the HD-P2 EASILY loses out in the looks department to Sound Devices, and Korg, and I even put it as a definite SECOND place in looks to the 671... well... once again... there is NO denying the functionality.

Preamps were mentioned earlier... and I'm guessing that the internal preamps (which I'll probably never use) will sound equal or better than the 671, if both units are utilizing LINE INPUT... Most people are confused about the 670 and 671... the 671 gained something like 12db in SN over the 670... it wasn't JUST the addition of 24/96 that made the 671 better... it was a total improvement in the discreet circuitry when running it line in.

From everything I've read and seen so far in the HD-P2 pre-amps, it's probably a fair bit better circuitry in this department overall. If you do NOT buy a mixer for either unit then the choice will be even more obvious.

Even in the 671 the SN specs vary by 27 WHOPPING DB in line versus mic-in... and the HD-P2 only has a variance of 3 DB in SN for line versus mic-in. 'Nuff said on that.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top