recorder/mixer

S

scottwilson

Member
well i am saving for some sound equipment and have a few questions. Ive read that the sound devices 552 is a good mixer but how is the recording aspect of it? Looks like it can do wav and mp3. Is the 552 a mixer that happens to record? Kind of like cameras that happen to have onboard mics?

I am hoping to be able to get decent sound but arent sure whether to get something like that or to go straight mixer and then get a zoom or tascam to record to and save money. Is the higher price worth it?

I am having to be a jack of all trades right now and sound is not my specialty.
 
That's a good way to look at it: a mixer that happens to record. It's a great device, but I cannot see it functioning as a primary recorder. Mostly that's a logistical concern, with no LCD screen to keep track of file naming. It's pretty much down to a default naming/numbering sequence, making field logging a little challenging. As far as quality, I've not heard anything bad from the WAV files.

A great advantage of the 552 over other SD mixers is the rotary pan control, as opposed to the hard L-C-R switched control on other models (302, MixPre). That can be a really nice feature in certain situations.

The other major plus to the 552 is that each of the 5 inputs has its own direct out, meaning you can feed them individually to a multi-track recorder for complete mix control in post.

However, if you don't need 5 inputs and you don't need the direct outs, you might also look at the 302 and an external recorder. You could go with the 302 and a TASCAM HD-P2 for less than the 552, or for a little it more (and a great combo) the 302 and a Sound Devices 702.
 
scottwilson said:
well i am saving for some sound equipment and have a few questions. Ive read that the sound devices 552 is a good mixer but how is the recording aspect of it? Looks like it can do wav and mp3. Is the 552 a mixer that happens to record? Kind of like cameras that happen to have onboard mics?

I am hoping to be able to get decent sound but arent sure whether to get something like that or to go straight mixer and then get a zoom or tascam to record to and save money. Is the higher price worth it?

I am having to be a jack of all trades right now and sound is not my specialty.
Click to expand...
what exactly you are planning to do with , work ?
or find someone to work with ?
what camera do you use ?
 
thanks for the info. The tascam p2 and the 302 looks like a good combo for less money. If i can save up enough the 702 looks sweet.
 
well my main use is for the feature i want to do but i have been doing a little video work(commercials) for the company i work for.

Right now i am using my a1 and may have access to an hpx170.

One thing i forgot to ask, i assume a better mixer is more important than a good recorder?
 
Last edited:
While indeed the 552 is a mixer that "happens to record" there is absolutely no reason why you couldn't use it as your primary recorder with proper procedure.

How many decades was the standard field recorder a reel to reel without a display?

Any "feature" based sound mixer is going to be writing sound reports with scene/take/file information and with voice slating at the top (or end) of the scene
thats actually on the file I really don't see this being a problem.

If the production isn't slating properly whether or not you name a file xxx or yyy, post production is going to have to search for it later.
(if you aren't doing timecode)

Of course the 552 doesn't have timecode, but it accepts time code so if you have to go that route there are more than a few options that will solve that.

The sound quality of the recorder is beyond excellent. The recorded file will sound identical to what the mic sounds like "live".

I've rented out my 552 on numerous occasions where they used the recorder function all came back saying it was great.
(commercials with a 5d, shorts, feature length.)

As far as your question about which is more important mixer or recorder. It all is.
The whole will only be as good as the sum of its parts. Whatever the weak link is, that is as good as your sound will get.
 
Having recorded my first short on a reel to reel Nagra, I pretty much agree with Rippie, though I must say I wouldn't want to go back to not having a display. Especially when I want to play back a certain take or wind through it it's nice to be able to read the file name and time. I guess it pretty much depends on what kind of stuff you'll be working on and what the pace of the production will be like. Edirol/Roland R-44 and Tascam DR-680 are nice and not too expensive recorders too that would work great with an SD 302...
 
look into a zoom.they make the best low budget portable multi track recorders.I use a roland vs 1880 but suggest you go for a zoom and some computer software like cubase or flstudio(ihave both) to do you mixing and mastering.They have video players as well so you can do it all on a nice interface and its cheap.fl studio is a very powerful daw and dirt cheap considering all the mastering plugins it comes with. the eq 2 and multiband compressor alone are worth the price of the whole package
 
thanks for all the replies. I do have one last qestion. Im pretty convinced on sd equipment.

Would there be a big difference in quality in these three scenarios?

1)getting the sd 302 and then a recorder like a zoom/tascam

2)getting the 552 for both mixing/sound

3)getting the sd 302 and the sd 702

How would you rate these three scenarios in terms of audio quality when compared to each other.

From 1-10 how would you rate each scenario.

Thanks
 
I'd go with either option 2 or 3, each being fantastic options. Option 1 is great, especially with the Tascam. If we're talking HD-P2 up to the SD 702, then Zoom should not even enter the equation.
 
I would also stay away from the Zoom. It's a great option when it's all you can manage to scrape up the cash for but there are a lot of inconveniences in the field that you can avoid by going with something more user friendly.

Otherwise your sort of between two different scenarios. The 552 is all in one, smaller package with more inputs (but less feedback), the 302 + HDp2 is bulkier and you will need a bag (well you need a bag anyway, but you'll need a bigger bag) but it's more flexible, since you can pull it apart and use them in different ways, but it has fewer inputs, takes more batteries etc. Sound wise I think you will be happy with either so it's more about how you plan to work and what fits that style best.
 
i've heard rumors on another forum of a multichannel recorder/mixer being announced at NAB. i tried my damndest to get more info but couldn't. i was told, "if you buy a 552 now, you'll be kicking yourself at NAB". so yeah, take that for what it is...
 
It'd be cool if SD came out with a four channel version of the 302 with a built-in recorder, kind of like they did going from the 442 to the 552. Even still, I can't imagine kicking myself after getting a 552. There's been many times I wished I had one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top