Need advice on choosing the right sound recorder / mixer...

D

Dave Draper

Well-known member
OK, guys. Need advice on choosing the right sound recorder / mixer for dialogue.

Initially, we were thinking we'd just go with a Sound Devices MixPre-D Mixer, then we thought "What if we're working with a camera that doesn't have an audio-in?".

The Sound Devices 633 would be a great choice (as suggested by some of the guys over at REDUser), but the budget just isn't going to permit such an expense at this time.

A few have suggested the Zoom F8 as an alternative to the 633, yet I can't help but think spending a grand on an F8 could be a grand saved up to put towards a 633.

Which makes me wonder if we'd be better off looking at the other end of the scale for the time being -- just to have a half-decent device that records audio independently -- and consider something like a Tascam DR-100MKIII.

Whatever we decide on, all I know is that it must have a low-noise floor, and a full dynamic range. Any additional requirements, I'm all ears.

What are your thoughts?
 
The little plastic "shaver" recorders broadly have the reputation of NOT having low-noise floor.

IMHO, the Zoom F4 would appear to be a worthy candidate somewhere between the little plastic toys and the high-end SD battle-gear.
 
How many channels do you need to record? Consider shopping for used Sound Devices gear, it is really well made & sounds great. Not knowing the rest of your signal chain (mics, recorder etc.) it is hard to say how much you will benefit from a Mix Pre D. I use mine to record into an Atomos Ninja2 with great results. I have also the mkii versions of the Tascam DR100 & DR60 - they sound pretty good too, but not the same league as the Mix Pre.
 
The F4/8 have decent specs/preamps and would sound pretty damn good in 'experienced hands'. I'd be more concerned with the operators skill level and good proper microphones than the quality difference between a Zoom and a SD.
 
Since I have the Zoom F4, I can recommend that. As a minimum you will also need a couple of SD cards, and some rechargeable batteries.

I am actually getting by with one 64gb SD card and 8 AA NiMH, but you will want to at least double that if you are putting in full days. You can buy extra battery holders for quick changes, or use an external battery pack. The dual SD cards allow you to record redundant tracks to protect from drop outs, etc. Actually designed for film use.

About the size of a paperback dictionary. Full timecode. Records 4 mic tracks with excellent preamps + two additional line-in tracks + L/R output tracks (8 total).

All in all worth the $650.
 
Once you get into the level of the Zoom F4, the only real draw to paying the big jump up to SD is the access to analog limiters. If those aren't important to you, the F4 seems like a great choice. I

If you really need the limiters, then you could also get a mix pre (or Shure FP24 used) and a cheaper recorder. Bypassing the mic pres and going Line In from the Sound Devices will get you pretty good audio. Again, the Zoom is a more elegant all in one solution as long as the analog limiters aren't critical to you.

I'm considering making the same purchase soon.
 
Dave Draper said:
Which makes me wonder if we'd be better off looking at the other end of the scale for the time being -- just to have a half-decent device that records audio independently -- and consider something like a Tascam DR-100MKIII.

Whatever we decide on, all I know is that it must have a low-noise floor, and a full dynamic range. Any additional requirements, I'm all ears.
Click to expand...

You're almost there -- you can use a Tascam DR-100mk2/3, but only if you feed it with a MixPre-D. Give it either line level in (as long as it's a true line-in that bypasses the mic preamp circuits [I think the DR-100 is, but you'll want to check before you commit], or you can feed it the AES3 the MixPre-D can give you, into the S/PDIF input of the Tascam. The SD/Tascam combination would work, as would a number of other low end recorders that can take a true line-in. Buy all of this on the used markets because why not?

But it might be a smarter use of your money to instead look seriously at the Zoom F4. It's smaller, it's one piece, and unless you're using high end mics and a skilled boomop, you probably won't notice any difference in sound quality.
 
Bruce Watson said:
You're almost there -- you can use a Tascam DR-100mk2/3, but only if you feed it with a MixPre-D. Give it either line level in (as long as it's a true line-in that bypasses the mic preamp circuits [I think the DR-100 is, but you'll want to check before you commit], or you can feed it the AES3 the MixPre-D can give you, into the S/PDIF input of the Tascam. The SD/Tascam combination would work, as would a number of other low end recorders that can take a true line-in. Buy all of this on the used markets because why not?

But it might be a smarter use of your money to instead look seriously at the Zoom F4. It's smaller, it's one piece, and unless you're using high end mics and a skilled boomop, you probably won't notice any difference in sound quality.
Click to expand...


I started with a similar kit and it served me well. And once you have the mixer, you can add a better recorder in the future. You won't be sorry to have the DR-100 around as a backup or a very decentstand alone recorder to throw in a travel bag. Having said that, the all in one SD mixer recorders seem like a nice way to go except for one personal issue. The SD mixers have LED meters that are particularly bright and easy to read due to the length of the arc of the meter. The newest SD products use a LED screen, which for me, isn't a good thing.
 
ozmorphasis said:
Once you get into the level of the Zoom F4, the only real draw to paying the big jump up to SD is the access to analog limiters. If those aren't important to you, the F4 seems like a great choice. I

If you really need the limiters, then you could also get a mix pre (or Shure FP24 used) and a cheaper recorder. Bypassing the mic pres and going Line In from the Sound Devices will get you pretty good audio. Again, the Zoom is a more elegant all in one solution as long as the analog limiters aren't critical to you.

I'm considering making the same purchase soon.
Click to expand...


In features, many of the economy recorders rival the SD products. And many might even produce very good audio. But for professional use, there is no doubt that SD products are much more robust. The is more to this than just the audio quality.
 
ggrantly said:
In features, many of the economy recorders rival the SD products. And many might even produce very good audio. But for professional use, there is no doubt that SD products are much more robust. The is more to this than just the audio quality.
Click to expand...

Yes, without a doubt, but the OP already made it clear that an all in one SD box such as the 633 is not financially an option. So, if you still want the low noise floor, etc, then you either do a combo of SD front end plus cheaper recorder, or an all in one that checks off the audio quality and is a bit of a compromise on build (Zoom F4). Going the route of a SD front end gives you the sound quality, limiters, and the robustness that you are referring to, and then only a part of the chain (the small cheap recorder) can go down in flames in the field for its lack of robustitude. Like I said, I'm all for that, but at that point an elegant all-in-one that hits the audio quality marks, is generally considered pretty good build (based on F8 reviews), and is comparatively affordable...well, everyone has to make their decision.
 
Ozmo,

Agree with your comment. And you have to run what you brung, and that's what a limited budget means. I bought used. Until I was able to step up, I had a DR680 filling the same type of roll; a decent bit-bucket with 4 preamps and when needed, a mixer in front. This produced entirely good audio. The DR680 mixer component is lacking and it would seem the the new Zooms have improved on that. Economy recorders have changed a lot in a few years and all for the good.
 
Great input, guys. Quite a few votes for the F4. Interesting.

I would definitely prefer analogue limiters, but is the idea that the high dynamic range on the F4, and the ability to record a back-up track at a lower DB, makes up for that?

Also, with regards to the F4 versus the F8; are there any differences between the two that'd make you go for one over the other? Besides the obvious difference in the amount of channels.
 
I just finished a 12 day feature shoot with a F4, and I found it to be an extraordinary value. If you are doing multiple long days you will definitely want a Li-on battery pack and use the AA batteries strictly for back up. I already had a bunch of V-mount batteries with d-tap outlets, and one of those will run the F4 for 2 days without recharging. I found the only hearable difference in quality to be the quality of the mic being used. With good mics like a Senn MKH 50, the sound was pretty much flawless. I used the limiters on occasion, but did not rely on them heavily and hear little compromise as long as you are not really overdriving the track and using the limiters to do the operators job. If you want to set it and forget it, use the dual track record or a simple Y splinter to run a whisper track and a scream track. If I were in your position I would spend the money you save with F4 and buy the best mics you can afford. You will end up with better sound than with an expensive SD recorder and $200 mics. When you can afford a better recorder, by all means do, and keep the F4 as very capable backup.
 
Dave Draper said:
Also, with regards to the F4 versus the F8; are there any differences between the two that'd make you go for one over the other? Besides the obvious difference in the amount of channels.
Click to expand...

Two on the F4 that I know of for sure: 1--easier to use trim knobs. 2--that B&W display, no matter what people say about cheap, can be read in bright sunlight.

Opps... Make that 3: 3--longer battery life.

Of course if you are using 8 mic's the F4 will not do at all.
 
graywolf said:
Two on the F4 that I know of for sure: 1--easier to use trim knobs. 2--that B&W display, no matter what people say about cheap, can be read in bright sunlight.

Opps... Make that 3: 3--longer battery life.

Of course if you are using 8 mic's the F4 will not do at all.
Click to expand...

At the risk of asking a stupid question; what kind of scenario would typically require 5 or more microphones and necessitate the use of the F8?
 
Dave Draper said:
At the risk of asking a stupid question; what kind of scenario would typically require 5 or more microphones and necessitate the use of the F8?
Click to expand...

You can easily run into these scenarios, depending on what you shoot. Especially ENG, reality or live tv. My big mixer is an SD 664(6/12 input, 16 track record). We were following a college football player, his fiancé and some other players around a children's hospital and we were running two Lectro SR's(2 ch's each) and a boom. There are five ch's tied up right there. And while not addressing five plus channels specifically, we ended up needing four channels for just two subjects this past weekend, because the agency we were doing EPK interviews for wanted everyone boomed and laved.
 
Dave Draper said:
At the risk of asking a stupid question; what kind of scenario would typically require 5 or more microphones and necessitate the use of the F8?
Click to expand...

Real typically a 4 track recorder is used up with 2 lavs, a boom mic, and an ambiance mic. So more than 2 talents could easily use more than 4 tracks.

Some sound people consider 8 tracks to be the minimum for low end professional recording, going by what I read on the boards I frequent. That said, I think most people doing documentary or ENG work well get by real well with a 4 track recorder. Music-wise for stereo a 4 track should be fine. As I mentioned I bought the F4, and so far have only used up to 3 tracks. But then I only have one radio mic.

I do have a mixer deck that can add another 8 tracks feeding into the 5/6 mini-jack on the F4 if I needed to. Come to think of it, I could run a couple of battery powered preamps into that 5/6 jack for 6 mic's in out in the field. I think I need to plan on buying a couple of wired lav's real soon now.
 
I can remember when Ampex came out with Grand Master 499 and I spent a prep day spooling reels for my Nagra. Caught up in the moment of how much better my field recordings would be with this new tape formulation. It's now 2017 and we have affordable 8 track recorders which for all intensive purposes out perform the reel to reel field recorders of the past. And yet I would rather work with a single well boomed and recorded mono track from an old reel to reel, than sort through 8 tracks of poorly recorded mind numbing nonsense from a modern digital recorder. Just saying, track count isn't everything.
 
Last edited:
Dave Draper said:
At the risk of asking a stupid question; what kind of scenario would typically require 5 or more microphones and necessitate the use of the F8?
Click to expand...

Really depends on what you record. As mentioned Reality TV often goes well beyond 4. Production work in a feature is often only a couple of tracks, or one, but can go a lot higher in certain styles. Altman liked to mic up everyone he could and then deal with it in the edit. So M.A.S.H. (the film) supposedly was recorded to eight tracks (a big PITA at the time).

FX recording is often mono or stereo but when say rigging a car you could go over 4our tracks pretty easily. Also things like canon balls have been done with mics placed at different points down range and that would be better with a multi track recorder instead of multiple machines and having to try and sync in the edit. FX in general could often go more than four. Usually we would be doing separate passes but it would speed things up to mic it up and do them all at once.

And music. Once you step past stereo eight tracks is probably the least you would want, assuming more than a duo.

Of course an upside to a really stable TC deck is that you can add on if needed. Just jam sync all the boxes to the master and you could rent/ borrow and bunch of R8's and do 80 tracks at once in sync.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top