PIX-220 enough? Or Tascam DR-40 as well?

Grug

Grug

Veteran
Hi guys,

I'm in the process of pulling together my first video kit of my own at the moment, and being half-deaf, audio is the one area my knowledge has never been all that high in.

I'm looking at getting either an FS100 or D800 along with a ProRes recorder and I was wondering if anyone could weigh in on how the Sound Devices PIX-220 would handle on-location audio?

The idea of capturing all my audio on-camera and therefore having it synced with my video footage has a lot of appeal, however if the PIX-220's audio capabilities aren't quite enough, I'll opt for an Atomos Ninja and put the money I save towards something like a Tascam DR-40.

So would the PIX-220 be enough? Or should I really get off-camera sound as well?

Any advice would be much appreciated.

Cheers
 
There is nobody on the planet that I would trust more than Sound Devices to get the audio parts perfect on a video recorder. Now Atomos may (?) make really top-notch equipment as well, but they don't have the top of the heap reputation of Sound Devices.

IMHO (not supported by hands-on experience, but only by reputation and user reports) I would expect that that sound performance of the PIX-220 (and 240) are quite probably BETTER than the DR-40.

Not completely sure what you mean by "should I really get off-camera sound as well?". Assume you are NOT routing audio THROUGH the camera in any way. Perhaps a more complete explanation of your setup would be in order.
 
Last edited:
Richard Crowley said:
There is nobody on the planet that I would trust more than Sound Devices to get the audio parts perfect on a video recorder. Now Atomos may (?) make really top-notch equipment as well, but they don't have the top of the heap reputation of Sound Devices.

Not completely sure what you mean by "should I really get off-camera sound as well?". Assume you are NOT routing audio THROUGH the camera in any way. Perhaps a more complete explanation of your setup would be in order.
Click to expand...

Hi Richard, the Atomos recorders don't feature audio inputs, so what I'm wondering is whether the Sound Devices PIX's audio inputs and controls will provide high-enough performance/control to handle the sound input from my off-camera/boom mic without the need for an additional audio recorder (i.e. the DR-40)?

I'll have a secondary, on-camera mic mounted to the camera - but if I can use the single PIX recorder to capture (and control) both my off-camera sound and picture, that holds a lot of appeal.

Basically, I'm hoping to avoid needing dual-system sound (insofar as the PIX recorder will be mounted to the camera) if practicable.
 
As I said in my revision, the mic preamps (and audio performance in general) of the Sound Devices PIX recorders is almost certainly SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER than most anything Tascam makes, including the DR-40. Remember that (as you can tell from the name) Sound Devices is first and foremost a source of SOUND equipment. And there is nobody I would trust more than SD for getting that part right on the money. Recording digital video is simply a matter of designing equipment to handle the bitstream. It is digital, it either works or it doesn't. No real latitude for "quality" differences in digital video recording.

I continue to be very confused by your term "off-camera sound". If you could avoid that phrase (or define it better) it would help understanding. Note that "on-camera sound" or "from-camera sound" is held in quite low regard in production sound circles. Microphones placed ON a camera are virtually never in the right place to pick up a decent recording. And the audio section of ANY camera (of ANY price) is mediocre at BEST.
 
Richard Crowley said:
As I said in my revision, the mic preamps (and audio performance in general) of the Sound Devices PIX recorders is almost certainly SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER than most anything Tascam makes, including the DR-40. Remember that (as you can tell from the name) Sound Devices is first and foremost a source of SOUND equipment. And there is nobody I would trust more than SD for getting that part right on the money. Recording digital video is simply a matter of designing equipment to handle the bitstream. It is digital, it either works or it doesn't. No real latitude for "quality" differences in digital video recording.

I continue to be very confused by your term "off-camera sound". If you could avoid that phrase (or define it better) it would help understanding. Note that "on-camera sound" or "from-camera sound" is held in quite low regard in production sound circles. Microphones placed ON a camera are virtually never in the right place to pick up a decent recording. And the audio section of ANY camera (of ANY price) is mediocre at BEST.
Click to expand...

Thanks Richard (I didn't notice your revision previously). Production-wise I'm used to dual-system sound recording, where we have one mic located on the camera that records audio to the onboard video media (and generally functions as our secondary/backup audio source); and a second mic (usually on a boom or lapel) recording to a separate recorder, that we then have to sync in post with the video footage (that's what I mean by "off-camera sound").

Having never handled 'proper' (i.e. off-camera) audio recording on a production myself, the specifics of the process are all quite new to me. But what I'm trying to get my head around, is whether the PIX-220 functions well-enough as the 'off-camera' half of a dual-system audio recording setup. To cover my on-location sound needs for production?
 
NOBODY makes better production audio equipment than Sound Devices. Some vendors may make equipment AS GOOD as SD.
I would not have the slightest doubt that the audio performance of the PIX devices is absolutely as good as it gets on this planet.
Full stop. Anything else (including anything from Tascam) is downhill from there, IMHO. I have no additional superlatives to use.
 
The PIX-220 does not have rotary faders, like a functionally designed ENG/FP mixer, but neither does the DR-40. The PIX-220 for sure has top-shelf pre-amps and converters. Will it immediately make everything you record sound great?... Not if you can't capture good audio with a lower cost recorder already. If you just want to record 'audio only' to that recorder, I would choose a 700 series audio recorder.
 
This PIX machines have the same pres as the sound devices recorders, which are top notch/can't get much better. However, that being said, it's not like you can easily adjust levels on the thing. There aren't two faders to grab. You can access the audio levels in the software menus. Will it work well for you? Probably, assuming you don't throw really loud levels at it and you or someone else is monitoring the audio. The thing is impressive as hell.
 
Rick R said:
The PIX-220 does not have rotary faders, like a functionally designed ENG/FP mixer, but neither does the DR-40. The PIX-220 for sure has top-shelf pre-amps and converters. Will it immediately make everything you record sound great?... Not if you can't capture good audio with a lower cost recorder already. If you just want to record 'audio only' to that recorder, I would choose a 700 series audio recorder.
Click to expand...

davefisk said:
This PIX machines have the same pres as the sound devices recorders, which are top notch/can't get much better. However, that being said, it's not like you can easily adjust levels on the thing. There aren't two faders to grab. You can access the audio levels in the software menus. Will it work well for you? Probably, assuming you don't throw really loud levels at it and you or someone else is monitoring the audio. The thing is impressive as hell.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback guys, it sounds like the PIX is going to offer most of what I want (especially avoiding having to sync sound in post). I'll book in a demo with one at a local dealer, and see how manageable it is without conventional rotary dials for adjusting levels.

Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top