Leaked: new Sound Devices MixPre-10T is coming soon?!?!

Something caught my eye in the article. I didn't realize the 633 included the Dugan automix. Very cool. Dan Dugan is a very interesting guy who's shop is almost walking distance from where I was living in SF. The Auotomix was a hardware box that he sold for mostly live situations where you had a conference with a bunch of people miced up and it would auto mute mics people weren't using. It's more than that but that was a big part so the mixer wasn't tying to guess who was going to talk and who wasn't. Having all up and live the whole time is a time bomb.

Anyway one of his other claims to fame is being the first person (at least documented in the US) to get a credit as a "sound Designer". He is also one of the few folks in the Bay Area that is authorized to repair and maintain NAGRA analog recorders.

OT but...
 
Difficult to say at this point, since I have not used or even seen the 10T feature and spec sheet yet.
One thing's for sure though, neither will sound very good in inexperienced hands.. a typical PA for instance.
 
kevin baggott said:
I'm not really a sound guy - I'm slowly learning though...

Would love to hear from anybody what they think are the strongest differences between the new MixPre-10T and say something like the SD 663?
Click to expand...

The MixPre-10T is a huge jump in the MixPre line. I literally just picked up a MixPre-6 a couple weeks ago, and now wish I'd waited. But, you don't know what you don't know.

The 633 has three pre-amped inputs on XLR, and three line inputs on TA-3 (mini XLR).

It has a stereo mix out on dua XLR, mic/line selectable, 2 AUX outputs on dual TA-3, and two more AUX outputs (X3, X4) on 1/8"TRS. Plus, it can send out up to 4 channels of AES digital on the XLR outputs. This makes for some pretty flexible interconnect with both traditional ENG mixer>camera snake and wireless camera hops. It's an overall heftier device that records both to SD and CF cards. The three mic inputs also have rotary pan control. It records up to 10 tracks: 6 iso inputs, the two AUX outs (X1, X2), and the main stereo mix outs. The LCD display is not a touch screen, so all menu functions are navigated with buttons, dials, and switches.

It records on multiple cards, so you can have a redundant card for a failsafe. It also offers AES digital inputs and outputs.

The 633 is also compatible with the CL12 external fader control units, which are very helpful for cart-based mixing. The MixPre series is not compatible.

The MixPre-10T has 8 pre-amped inputs on XLR (actually, combo XLR/TRS). It only has balanced output on dual TA-3 outputs, but it does have (unbalanced) AUX outs on 1/8" TRS. It has only two AUX mixes, so there are no X3 or X4. No AES i/o. Records to a single SD card only, with USB file backup that automatically updates when recording stops... not the same as redundant recording media. Pan control is handled in a menu, rather than by rotary pot, and the LCD screen is a touch screen. It records up to 12 tracks: 8 iso tracks on the inputs, X1, X2, and stereo mix. Though, two of those record tracks may possibly be assignable to the 1/8" TRS 9&10 input.

The 1/8" TRS input can also serve as a camera return for monitoring the camera from the mixer end, something the 633 has as a dedicated feature (1/8" TRS input specifically for camera return), or as another source of time code input.

Both feature internal TC generator, as well as TC i/o for jamming to other devices.

The pre-amps in the MixPre-6 are stellar, basically the same as in the 6-series mixer/recorders. I assume the same pre-amps will be in the 10T.

The 10T adds some of the crucial stuff that was missing in the smaller units for intense field use, including LEMO connection for external power (such as from an NP-1 cup or a BDS), balanced outputs for camera connect (wired or wireless) and dedicated BNC connection for time code i/o. This could be a formidable entry point to serious ENG/EFP audio. It's certainly a damn fine tool for indies.

The ability to dump tracks straight to a USB thumb drive to hand off to a client is potentially one of the most helpful things Sound Devices have included.

Most of the network (broadcast and cable) clients I know these days specifically request a Sound Devices 6 series (633, 644, 688) in the kit. Not sure how long it will take (if ever) for them to accept this as a legit ENG/EFP audio mixer/recorder, but they should.

I purchased the MixPre-6 for use in SFX field recording for sound design, but again I kind of wish I'd known this was coming down the pipe.
 
Hey Alex - I owe ya a house by the sea. PM me and let me know what ocean ya want to face.
I really appreciate you breaking it down like that.
Was happy to hear ya say ya think the pre-amps are comparable with the 6-series - I didn't know the "Pan control is handled in a menu, rather than by rotary pot"
And many other things ya pointed out.
Again - thanks a lot.
kevin
 
Eric Coughlin said:
Most stores have a 30 day return policy and would not mind you returning an item so you could replace it with a more expensive item from them.
Click to expand...

I was kidding... partly.

The MixPre-6 is a convenient size for some of my OMB shoots, where I like to keep a small mixer/recorder harnessed to my chest. It's actually a perfect size for that. So, I won't be returning it.

Heck, I have a DR-60DmkII and have no intention of ditching it because there are days when you need a stunt recorder you don't mind putting at risk. For example, strapping it down to a roller coaster (which I have done). Or wearing it when you have to wade the shallow end of a pool to grab boomed audio (done that, too).

But I may still pick up the 10T...
 
kevin baggott said:
I really appreciate you breaking it down like that.
Was happy to hear ya say ya think the pre-amps are comparable with the 6-series - I didn't know the "Pan control is handled in a menu, rather than by rotary pot"
And many other things ya pointed out.
Click to expand...

One biggie that I forgot to mention is that the 633 does have Dugan auto mixing, and the 10T does not. But that may or may not be something that matters to you.
 
It's on Youtube as of today. B&H has it for pre-order. $1800. Double the Mixpre-6.

If it was maybe $1200...

I record dialog on set. I don't need 10 inputs. I rarely need more that four inputs. I'll spend my precious dollars on better mics. Would love to have timecode and balanced outputs, however. Form factor is pretty much the same, larger, of course, but still pretty small. It would fit in a smallish audio bag. Same preamps. Same touch screen.

More competition for the F8.

But...stealth. I had no clue this was coming.
 
Last edited:
I welcome the new product from Sound Devices. But at the same time I would hate to see them get caught up in a race to the bottom. Maybe it's because I'm a little old, and remember the good old days when you didn't heed iso's on every single dog fart. Switching to crotchety old man voice.... Back in my day a sound mixer WAS a sound mixer. We mixed everything to a single channel Nagra. And we liked it! OK, got that out of the way. The point being, I wonder which market is steering their boat these days? Is it the high end professional sound mixer, reality TV, or possibly the low end indie film crowd which demands poly recordings of a ridiculous amount of channels even when their budget and experience level falls way short of supporting such a work load? I don't know, I'm just thinking out loud.

Dave
 
David W. Jones said:
... I wonder which market is steering their boat these days? Is it the high end professional sound mixer, reality TV, or possibly the low end indie film crowd which demands poly recordings of a ridiculous amount of channels even when their budget and experience level falls way short of supporting such a work load? I don't know, I'm just thinking out loud.
Click to expand...

Yes to all. There's not one contributing factor.

Like many things, I really think that the initial availability of the technology - especially when the price is reasonable - gets more people on the bandwagon. Even 25 years ago, if we had only two people on camera, we'd split the mics on the sends to cam for mix control in post. Three people, and we'd prioritize one to iso and mix the other two. Now, we don't have to make that choice. We can mix, and have the ISOs. Best of both worlds.

A PSM is still a PSM in my experience. The ISOs are there just in case, but the main mix is still sent to cam and is recorded internally as well, and is often what gets used (for most but not all TV... film is a very different beast).

It also really depends on the client. I get called for a TV tabloid show that rolls through Knoxville once in a while. That production is GIGO (the garbage in, garbage out), and typically I just take a field mixer without recorder (SD442). They want it quick and dirty, and don't care as long as the sound is audible and recorded to camera.

C-SPAN has weird delivery specs, and again just want it recorded to camera since they essentially want to take the card from the camera and send it straight to air with some graphics on top. But we'll often roll backups and I like to have ISOs because we'll actually run some post on it once in a while. But that's personal preference and not a network thing.

Some of the higher-level news magazines want mix to cam (split if only two mics), plus ISOs. And a stereo mix file from the mixer/recorder that is rushed to the transcriptionist.

Reality and follow-doc shows for cable networks want mix+iso. Always. And they want 633, 644, or 688 specifically. It's also getting to where they often send their own audio packages, rather than pay the sound person rental on top of labor.

It's become a client-based demand, though it may be a chicken vs. egg issue. Do the networks expect it now because so many of the sound pros started carrying SD mixer/recorders? Or are we having to update our kits because of client demand? Either way, we can lament the old days when we had two (or, if you want to go back far enough, ONE) record track and that was it, or we can acknowledge that technology is making better options cheaper, and it's shaping the way we work.

But with 4 lavs and a boom running, as a single-person sound crew working from a bag, there's no way to swing the boom AND actively mix. So, I'll take the technological advancement for that.
 
David W. Jones said:
Maybe it's because I'm a little old, and remember the good old days when you didn't heed iso's on every single dog fart. Switching to crotchety old man voice.... Back in my day a sound mixer WAS a sound mixer. We mixed everything to a single channel Nagra. And we liked it!
Dave
Click to expand...

;~)...

Those dog farts come in really useful in post. We use them for ring tones for select people.

Actually this is kind of the same fight post mixers were having in the late 90's (probably still are).
Mixers did not like editors to "do their job" of mixing and would get really pissed if editors did level adjustments etc. BUT DAW's had come in and editors now could adjust levels and it is a lot easier if you can put stuff into balance while you edit to make sure it works. It's probably less of an issue now that even premixes are done as DAW sessions so mixers can undo easily an editors choice. In the 90's we were "printing" to tape so the editors level choices were baked in by the time it got to the mix stage.

As a post person I kind of dread getting 8 tracks (or more) of production because of the time load of sorting through it all. But as a production mixer it is really nice to have CYA coverage so...

And at least on low budget stuff with variable quality in the sound department having options is sometimes a life saver. And sometimes it's just more tracks of turds that don't take to polishing.
 
Noiz2 said:
And at least on low budget stuff with variable quality in the sound department having options is sometimes a life saver. And sometimes it's just more tracks of turds that don't take to polishing.
Click to expand...

That's the difference between having a sound person who mostly knows what s/he is doing, and the ISOs save an occasional goof, or someone who has no clue and assumes moving meters indicate "it's all good".

Even on studio shoots 15 years ago... large console in the audio room... we shot as-live, but had backups of everything. There was a production master (we're back to tape at this point) with a stereo mix plus the dialog and M&E stems. But then there were ISO reels from all the cameras, and a textless master (no graphics). That opened up several tapes with 4 channels of audio, so we'd rout ISO tracks for each mic, and both mono and stereo ISOs for music and SFX. The idea was that the production master could be sent straight to deliverables, but the show could always be taken back to its elements and conformed to fix small errors or to completely re-purpose the show. And that wasn't anything new for multi-cam as-live, or live, shows.

In today's age of digital, solid-state, the same is still done on large studio and truck-based shoots. It's nothing new, but what is (relatively) new is bringing that kind of functionality to an audio bag.
 
Alex H. said:
I forgot to mention is that the 633 does have Dugan auto mixing, and the 10T does not. But that may or may not be something that matters to you.
Click to expand...
- Initially, the 633 did not have Dugan auto mix either, it was added in a firmware update a while afterwards. The same may be the case with the 10T... I'll see how much info I can get out of Jon T. at the upcoming AES.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top