I need the REAL Pros to help answer this... r.e. MicroTrack.

MattinSTL

MattinSTL

Sound Modulator
I suppose this may be a nebulous question since I'm referring to a piece of gear that isn't even available yet... but maybe you can venture an educated opinion for me... or perhaps you'll have a concrete answer (or can get one for me).

I'm very intrigued by the soon to be released M-Audio MicroTrack. This thing looks like a toy but it's got SERIOUS specs! On paper it looks like it will flat-out SMOKE the Marantz 671 in sound quality.

The 671 does a lot of stuff that's really valuable to real pros, but it's not a top performer on sound quality unless you feed the line in with a good pre... The line-in on a 671 is 92db SN and the mic-in is only 65db SN. I'm not trying to bash a really common bit of pro kit here... just stating the specs that are really important to me. I've been wondering FOR YEARS why we haven't had a super-clean, little digital recorder with easy digital file management... and it looks like M-Audio has heard me and the million other people who have wished for it.

The MicroTrack is 100db SN for line or mic inputs... and the other specs are equally impressive. The thing looks to be a freakin' recording dynamo in a package a little bigger then a deck of cards! We're talking about something that would smoke any wireless in the world... including Zaxcom Digital... on sound quality... and NO chance of a drop-out or other RFI induced problem. (Okay Zaxcom's are already pretty well immune to that... but you get my point... most of us don't have $3500 wireless sets.)

So you have to deal with double sound... yeah, that DOES suck for the extra work... but the dividends in your soundtrack are pretty high. Basically without over-explaining everything I'm really excited about this new M-Audio recorder. I've already paid and I'm on the back-order list.

So I'd like to talk about this recorder and debate it's expected performance if anybody thinks it really WILL be just a toy... and if you guys are very interested I'll post a breakdown of the MicroTrack specs compared to the Marantz 671 specs. M-Audio knows sound... and this little baby looks to further cement their already good rep.


Now for my problem/question. If this thing really is all that... do I need to keep my Sound Devices MM-1? The MicroTrack has headphone monitoring and phantom 48v on tap for pro mics... So what's the MM-1 for? I guess for the times when I have a WIRED boom op and I want him to stay the hell away from me... and to monitor what he's doing?

Honestly I don't think the MicroTrack is going to replace my practice of recording directly into the DVX... it's just going to AUGMENT it... I'll still do a lot of mic-to-cam stuff.

So should I return the MM-1 or do you think it will still be worth having... and get significant use... if the MicroTrack turns out to be a recording superstar?

The MM-1 has a fantastic 126db SN... but even at line in the MicroTrack is 100db... so when am I ever gonna' realize the quality of the MM-1 anyway? Or do you think that as my audio skills improve I'll use the MM-1 for boom monitoring... more and more...?

Will there be a point in having a MicroTrack AND the MM-1? Input from the REAL sound guys please! Dave, Oleg, Ty... etc...
 
I wouldn't expect the preamps on the little MicroTrack to be a strong point. We can have some hope for the quality of the converters (though not much)... but I'd expect for any serious work to use at least external preamps.

Now, your application is intriguing... the comparison between wireless transmission and using the microtrack as a bodypack... that is, how the loss of quality using the little bugger compares to the loss of quality in FM modulation and transmission... that will be an interesting test.

In any case, this will NOT reduce your need for the MM-1. Keep it! You'll likely use it to feed the MicroTrack.

And, of course... specs are often meaningless. Most of people's most beloved and best-sounding gear looks lousy by specifications, and plenty of gear with miraculous specs - especially these days - sounds like junk.

Even now, retailers of the MicroTrack are suggesting front ends to replace both the preamps and converters... such as CoreAudio (http://www.core-sound.com/microtrack_2496.html).

So, it is a potentially useful device... but not miraculous. The hard part of audio has always tended to be in the analog world (from mic placement and design to preamps), and this unit likely does not address that nearly as well as your MM-1.
 
I read some of that before... but I just read ALL of it. Thanks for reminding me about that site.

You also reminded me that I wanted to check out the PDaudio thing BEFORE I paid for a MicroTrack... Doh!

We'll see how it goes... but considering they also say that the Marantz 670-671 aren't professional recorders EITHER... I'm even more confident that the MicroTrack will suit my needs really well.

The PDaudio device sounds like what I really want... but they list it at $350 with ONLY the ability to record digital signals... with NO line or mic in. No offense to them, but what the hell good is THAT?! A freakin' $50 soundcard can do THAT! It's field recording that we all want! Not JUST digital file management! So what does THAT do to the price? My guess is at least double it... on that site they say the PDaudio device can run up to $1200...

They also said they expect the MicroTrack's quality to at least be as clean and good as Sony's most recent DAT decks... sheee-it... that's good enough for me! Gimme' that bugger!

At THIS point I wouldn't even buy a wireless unless I HAD to... this may very well be the next "bodypack" solution.

I know that when I ran my ck69 on wireless boom I got a woody when I listened through the MM-1 (BEFORE the wireless transmission) and it crashed down when I checked the sound at the DVX...

Wireless is OKAY for lavs... not even great on them... but it flat out KILLS good shotguns and hypers... it friggin' KILLS those mics. Fact!
 
Well, I don't know that I'd advocate PDAudio - I don't know it, and, frankly, it looks kinda kludgy to me... I just don't want a generic Windows PDA in the loop on my audio. But I won't say anything for or against - i don't know it. But the info on the MicroTrack was useful.

They're talking about Sony's PORTABLE DAT decks, not full-size professional DAT decks. Not comparable.

Is there any reason to make this decision now? Get the MicroTrack, listen to that with and without MM-1 preamping, and let us know... then decide if you need the MM-1 or not.
 
I'm quite interested in the microtrack as well. I've budgetted for either an sd722 or an sd302 + cash (a fair amount...). The SD722 is probably recorder overkill and skimps some on the mixing. The SD302 will certainly do the mixing I need to do, and if the microtrack ends up half decent, I should have all the recording abilities I'll need for a while. Something tells me it's too good to be true though.

I'm waiting for the concert tapers to get their hands on it and put it through it's paces before I decide. Hope it ships soon.

Check out www.taperssection.com for a lot of talk about this and other portable recorders (722, etc.).

As far as the PDAudio goes, the taperssection guys seem not to be the biggest fans of it. Take it for what it's worth since I've never used it.
 
I dang near back ordered a Micro Track. They do seem to be pretty slick. Its small and the I/O is attractive, and usefull. Price tag is nice, but I wonder about durability. On a shoot its gonna get tossed in a Porta Brace with the mixer and hauled around like that. The way its set up I wonder if accidental button pushing will be common? Of coarse audio quality is key, but M-audio usually puts out good product. We'll see. I still think I want one.

The Marantz is not even an option in my opinion. Poor specs and not a friendly I/O.
 
I think of the MicroTrack as a convenient storage device, and for me the most intriguing feature is the SPDIF in... that way I have no worries about its audio quality; I'd just hook it up to good outboard gear, without having to worry about lugging around a computer and drive and such - though I'd likely use it mainly for backup of a DAW. I currently use a Fostex VF160 in similar capacity... though it'll record 16 tracks at once (44.1 only though) and holds 40GB. I'd love to have a smaller device (that captures higher-res audio) for non-multi-track gigs... and I guess really occasional use for stealth recording with its built-in capabilities. But the front end is almost certainly unsuitable for professional use. Find a way to feed it SPDIF!
 
ullanta said:
They're talking about Sony's PORTABLE DAT decks, not full-size professional DAT decks. Not comparable.

Is there any reason to make this decision now? Get the MicroTrack, listen to that with and without MM-1 preamping, and let us know... then decide if you need the MM-1 or not.
Click to expand...

Hey! Don't pee on my little parade! I'm choosing to tell myself that they meant it should be as good as the latest and most high-end Sony DAT decks available... :cheesy: I want it to be that great and so I'm going to wish it so... they almost named it the PeterPan 24/96... if you believe... it will be that great. :huh:

The only reason I wanted to make this decision now is 'cause I just bought the MM-1 from B&H less then 2 weeks ago... so if the MicroTrack makes the MM-1 somehow pointless I coulda' got a full refund while it's new and under B&H's terms for returns.

BUT... you already convinced me. I'm keeping it. Even though this isn't as functional as the MixPre or half as amazing as the 302... It's still one channel of Sound Devices perfection. -126db SN and a phenomenal headphone amp... plus it does some other really neat tricks... such as the ability to plug a walkie-talkie into it and the boom op can hear what he's doing AND you can tell him what to do at the same time! There's some other cool things I like about it too... so what the hell... it's staying.

Sooo... will the MicroTrack be "all that" or is it too good to be true? Hopefully we'll know in a couple weeks, tops. I understand that (based on the info on the Core Audio site you linked) that REAL 24/96 requires a -120db or so SN? Somehow the 24 bits isn't valid unless the SN is through the roof? (or "floor" as it were) They said that the MicroTrack, based on -100db SN, is probably more like a 17 bit recorder? Whatever... I really do believe the thing will be impressive... if nothing else I base this on the Sony MZ-R37 minidisc recorder that I had TWO of... That thing got CLEAN recordings and it's a dinosaur now! Okay it WAS the one minidisc recorder that was claimed to be unusually good... and it's the one that had a cult following (including me)... but the MicroTrack should EASILY smoke that thing! So for me... ALL it has to do is that... just beat the crap out of my MZ-R37... and it will be well worth the price of admission.

For the record I also fear the "toy-like" appearance of the thing... and I considered the possibilities of accidentally changing settings or hitting buttons... and that's part of the reason I'm keeping the MM-1... I'll set the levels, set it to record at the desired rate, and then PACK IT UP so there's no "oops" after 2 hours of not checking it.

Also, as a little bonus info for anybody interested in the MicroTrack... you can get one as soon as they're available by going to www.guygraphics.com and add one to your cart. Your card will not be charged until the unit ships and you will get the lowest price that you will find anywhere. $349 plus $6.67 UPS Ground... what a deal! If you do that please put in the notes that I sent you... I asked Clayton Guy for a good deal on these and he sent me an email stating, "beat this"... and I couldn't... so there.:thumbsup:
 
Hey Matt,

Your thoughts around the m-audio device got me thinking about how you could design workflow to use it instead of a wireless pack. Great idea in thought, but you start running into problems in execution. As far as I can tell, there are no remote control capabilities for it, so you would either have to start it and let it run, or rely on your actor to start and stop it. Also, there is no way to remotely monitor the audio being captured to adjust levels, so you would probably still have to hook up some sort of a wireless kit (albiet a much cheaper model) to be able to monitor. But, level adjustment would have to be manual (walking over to the actor and making changes directly). But, it is also cool in that it is a two channel recorder, so you can run it much like the suggested way of running into the DVX100 - set one channel at normal level and one a few steps lower to cover any potential blow-outs.

(BTW, I'm not trying to shoot down your idea...I was really excited by it because I am at the point where I need to pick up 3-4 wireless kits to expand my collection, and I am considering Lectro 201's or Zaxcom (if/when I can afford them), so this seemed like a perfect and much lower cost option.)

But, I can see using it to create a cableless boom situation, where the boom op is wearing the m-audio, and responsible for starting and stopping it. You could use the line out to send the feed via a lower cost wireless to your mixer to monitor quality, placement and levels, and even do scratch recording backup.

I also think it could be used as a backup device for your primary recorder (when the camera is not your backup). In fact, I will probably get one for that purpose no matter what (pending your review once you get yours ;-)

One other "issue" I can think of with it is perception (especially with less experienced directors). I use the Marantz today (yes, with some problems, but it has served me really well overall), and when I set it up, these inexperienced directors don't question it because it still looks like a DAT recorder. If I were to pull out one of the m-audio recorders, I think they would tend to be more nervous (even though it has almost exactly the same capabilities, and arguably better specs).

But, I think it could work really well in ENG situations, where it can just hang out in your bag, and won't be scrutinized as closely.

Anyway, just my rambling thoughts...take them for what you will. Let us know when you get yours what you think!

Phil
 
P.S. "kludgy" is my new favorite word... I don't know if that's a real word or not... but I sure as hell thought the PDAudio thing (in full regalia) looked kludgy too.:shocked:
 
MattinSTL said:
I understand that (based on the info on the Core Audio site you linked) that REAL 24/96 requires a -120db or so SN? Somehow the 24 bits isn't valid unless the SN is through the roof? (or "floor" as it were) They said that the MicroTrack, based on -100db SN, is probably more like a 17 bit recorder?
Click to expand...

Well, it's sorta like this: higher bit resolutions expand dynamic range DOWNWARDS. All digital audio has a top end of the dynamic range at 0dbFS; the smallest value measurable is, as they say, about -100db at 17 bits, and about -140db at 24 bits. So, some will argue, if your noise floor is around -100db, your usable dynamic range is only about 17 bits worth.

A popular argument, but it doesn't tell the whole story. A 24-bit sample size gives higher resolution throughout the dynamic range. Even if you don't get down to the -120db level, you still see benefits from 24-bit recording, because the measurement of signals near 0db, -12db, -83db - anywhere in the range - are rendered more precisely.
 
Dude YOU are a smart guy... and you communicate in a very effective way that makes you a valuable member to the forum. That explanation of the value in 24 bit recording is brilliant.
 
ptalsky has it right.
You need to monitor the audio and that will be difficult. Not only levels have to be monitored but quality of the sound. As an example, I've done work in hot envirnments where the actor sweats and the tape used to hold the hidden lav gives up and the mic slips. The mic is hidden so how do you know if it slipped unless you hear it. Same for various clothing russle problems. Sometimes this can be a real headache and requires trial and error...by listening.
Now this device might make a great double system or backup recorder fed by the mixer. But all sound should be monitored by a soundie through a good mixer.
 
Phil... I agree that the perception of this thing would NOT be high. I've used the Marantz 670 and it does look very pro. You would want to hide this thing in a PortaBrace bag on paid shoots... and that's honestly what I'll do. I'll set an entire PB bag on the table and reach into it... :grin: now that's funny, but it's the truth! What are you gonna' do? Pull out something that looks like an ipod and expect them to take you seriously? Bring the Marantz and run the wires back to the PB bag... and just have the XLRs end at nothing inside the bag... next to the MicroTrack. (kidding of course)

If I put this to use as a wireless replacement I'd just let the audio run... no start/stop. This would put you back in a situation of slating or somehow finding the action, but I'm not going to trash my wireless set, I just want this as a much better sounding option for times when it really matters.

As for changing the levels, you don't let the actors set their own levels with your wireless do you? Man I hope not! So in that respect it's the same setup... monitor, set, and leave it alone.

For booming HOPEFULLY the guy on the boom can be trusted to monitor his own audio. If not then you need a different boom op! Since it's got monitoring right on the unit you just have it in a bag (or a pocket 'cause it's so tiny) and run the headphones right there.

I hadn't thought about the standard two-channel safety setting yet... thanks for reminding me of that! For that matter in certain situations you can mic TWO different people from just this ONE unit! Well that takes some special situations... but I can already tell you that woulda' worked on about HALF the wireless shoots I've done! In those lucky instances this unit replaces TWO independent transmitter/bodypack systems. That's a cool thought. One of the actors would seem fully wireless and the other one is just wired to THAT guy or girl. Hmm.:happy:
 
MattinSTL said:
actually the new zaxcom tx line that will hit the market next year will have tx with internal recording capability and tc synchronization , so ...
but really the capability take digital input is nice since you can record directly from preamp or mixers with digital out , can work as a back up device if you supply your camera threw wireless connection , work as a preamp to your non phantom transmitter , record tc and mix for translation , work as additional iso tracks , make the atmosphere recording much simple if you recording directly to the camera , give you pb facility ,...... you name it ....
for 650$ ( 350+250 for 4gb cf card) its look like more then good investment
about preamp - usially devices like that dont have good analog stage preamp , so it probably will work as your dvx , so good mixer or preamp would be must for quality work
look this as additional tool to help you in your work flow
Click to expand...
 
xort... yeah you bring up some good points... I'm not saying this thing is THE answer... but it is AN answer. Limited? Yes. Truly professional solution? No. Capable of doing virtually professional quality and blowing away the sound quality of any wireless set short of a Zaxcom? Possibly... we will see.
 
Oleg... you make a lot of good points there! Man now I want one even more!

For those interested... www.newegg.com has Kingston 4 gb 45x high-speed compact flash with lifetime warranty from Kingston for $225 shipped.

Later this morning I'm going to call M-Audio and make sure the MicroTrack utilizes FAT32 file structure so that it can see cards larger then 2 gb. Ironically the Canon G5 could use a 4 gb card and my G6 can't. What the hell is up with THAT Canon? Why the backwards step? Honestly my guess is that FAT32 is actually a slower write and access and so they made a compromise to speed up the cam... but I hope the MicroTrack uses FAT32. 4 gb cards are only $40-$50 more then 2 gb cards!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top