recorder question
- Thread starter robbailey
- Start date
That's a very subjective question and therefore hard to answer, but at least in regards to a "cheaper mixer" there will probably be a bit more noise due to lesser quality preamps. If you used a good quality mixer, then the difference in pure audio quality becomes much smaller. The choice between a mixer and recorder as opposed to something like a 522 is more complicated than that though. A standalone mixer can be more flexible in some cases, but it also means that you have two pieces of equipment to manage, with more connections going between them, and to supply power for. A single unit can be more manageable, especially if you want to work out of a bag (most likely lighter too, which is not to be underestimated).
On another level, a sound devices product is probably going to be more stable and robust compared to a cheap handheld recorder.
Those are the prime reasons I can think of at the top of my head, but it's perfectly possible to get very good results with a quality mixer feeding a cheap recorder, and there are some people that work like this (though the recorder is often not the only storage - they usually feed a camera as well).
On another level, a sound devices product is probably going to be more stable and robust compared to a cheap handheld recorder.
Those are the prime reasons I can think of at the top of my head, but it's perfectly possible to get very good results with a quality mixer feeding a cheap recorder, and there are some people that work like this (though the recorder is often not the only storage - they usually feed a camera as well).
paulears
Veteran
It depends on many viewpoints. The physics says that the better the specification in terms of frequency response, signal to noise ratio, sampling rate and bit depth. The Sound Devices product has an excellent performance, way beyond the generally accepted specification for our hearing. It goes down to 10Hz and up to 50K - neither of those we can hear. The preamps have a very good performance in terms of noise - so if you need to record quiet sound sources at a distance with mics that have lower outputs than others, then you will get a benefit, compared to the cheaper units which generally struggle a bit with gain, because they're simpler and not designed to do the same job.
The best way to help you decide is to stick the specs into a spreadsheet (which will be tricky because the spec parameters are described a little differently), then decide if the price difference makes sense to you.
It is a bit like trying to compare a basic Ford to a top of the range luxury car. If you only do shopping and take kids to school, it can be argued that the luxury car is a waste - will you get much real benefit? It's really nice to have the extra performance and luxury - but when your money in your pocket matters, it's tricky.
Can you hear the difference?
I think that depending on the material, yes you can. If - you have trained ears. I remember being in a mega hi-fi shop once, and a guy was having a demo. I have to say what they played him sounded really excellent, but he looked at the salesman and said "Why is it so tinny?" - "That, Sir, is treble!" he was told. The trouble was, to this person, it sounded tinny - ears have to be educated.
You can hear hiss, and distortion with little training (hopefully) but the difference between 16/24/32 bit resolution is quite subtle, and on some sound sources just not audible. There does seem some evidence that increasing the upper frequency response above what your ears can hear in a test does have an impact. There does appear to be some hearing above the generally accepted cut off frequencies but less acceptance about how it works. I cannot hear 16KHz now - so having a recorder that can record up to 50KHz for me seems a bit pointless - BUT - I record for other people, don't I?
The two products you mention have a price difference that is huge! You could buy 10 of the Tascams for the price of a 522. Is it ten times better? Owners might say it is, but if you'd spent 3 grand on it, you would think that. Is the Tascam as good? Nope. yet it isn't rubbish either. It's an enthusiasts product with good value for money and quite decent performance. Would it survive the rough treatment the 522 seems built for? Nope. Does the 522 sound better? Yes. By how much? You'd have to try one and make your own mind up. For years I used SQN mixers (that other people owned) Very nice, reliable, chunky and solid. In truth working for myself, I just don't work on big enough projects to make ownership worthwhile or economic sense.
If you make your living from video that has good budgets, then you buy expensive kit. If your area of work has lower budgets then you purchase cheaper kit, and then maybe hire if you get a few luxury jobs.
Let your ears and pocket fight it out.
The best way to help you decide is to stick the specs into a spreadsheet (which will be tricky because the spec parameters are described a little differently), then decide if the price difference makes sense to you.
It is a bit like trying to compare a basic Ford to a top of the range luxury car. If you only do shopping and take kids to school, it can be argued that the luxury car is a waste - will you get much real benefit? It's really nice to have the extra performance and luxury - but when your money in your pocket matters, it's tricky.
Can you hear the difference?
I think that depending on the material, yes you can. If - you have trained ears. I remember being in a mega hi-fi shop once, and a guy was having a demo. I have to say what they played him sounded really excellent, but he looked at the salesman and said "Why is it so tinny?" - "That, Sir, is treble!" he was told. The trouble was, to this person, it sounded tinny - ears have to be educated.
You can hear hiss, and distortion with little training (hopefully) but the difference between 16/24/32 bit resolution is quite subtle, and on some sound sources just not audible. There does seem some evidence that increasing the upper frequency response above what your ears can hear in a test does have an impact. There does appear to be some hearing above the generally accepted cut off frequencies but less acceptance about how it works. I cannot hear 16KHz now - so having a recorder that can record up to 50KHz for me seems a bit pointless - BUT - I record for other people, don't I?
The two products you mention have a price difference that is huge! You could buy 10 of the Tascams for the price of a 522. Is it ten times better? Owners might say it is, but if you'd spent 3 grand on it, you would think that. Is the Tascam as good? Nope. yet it isn't rubbish either. It's an enthusiasts product with good value for money and quite decent performance. Would it survive the rough treatment the 522 seems built for? Nope. Does the 522 sound better? Yes. By how much? You'd have to try one and make your own mind up. For years I used SQN mixers (that other people owned) Very nice, reliable, chunky and solid. In truth working for myself, I just don't work on big enough projects to make ownership worthwhile or economic sense.
If you make your living from video that has good budgets, then you buy expensive kit. If your area of work has lower budgets then you purchase cheaper kit, and then maybe hire if you get a few luxury jobs.
Let your ears and pocket fight it out.
Using a lower cost Sound Devices mixer like the 302 or MixPre-D with the Tascam DR-100 Mk2 recorder will give you a very good result. You get the benefit of the excellent Sound Devices pre-amps and limiters, and can feed a clean LINE level audio signal to your DR-100 Mk2 recorder. ( this is a very good combo )
John Willett
Veteran
OK - with true professional units like Sound Devices, AETA, Nagra, and Sonosax you get superb build quality with a product designed to be used all day every day in a professional environment.
You get attention to detail with a well designed and well specified product where compromises are minimised.
You get high quaity, low noise, circuits that are consistent between units.
You get something that will be reliable over a long period.
Though using an AETA MIXY and the digital in of a DR100-II you will actually get better quality than a 552, IMHO, as the MIXY has superb mic. pre-amps and the DR100-II is only being used as a "bit bucket" with none of the analogue circuitry in the DR100-II being used at all.
If you considered going analogue in to the DR100, then you would be much better off with a true pro. unit.
Rick R
Veteran
While the SD 552's internal recorder sounds good, it was designed more as a back-up purposes then as the 'main' recorder. (and has a limited track count as well)
'It goes without saying' that the sound crews skills will ultimately play a huge roll in the end 'quality', so in any set-up, YMMV.
'It goes without saying' that the sound crews skills will ultimately play a huge roll in the end 'quality', so in any set-up, YMMV.
Noiz2
Sound Ninja
The real answer is you will get better sound with the better operator.
Untill you get down to real junk equipment all the stuff out there can give you exceptional sound IF it's in the right hands.
Get a really good person and use whatever they like to use. That is how you will get the best sound.
Oh and then get a good post person ;~)
Untill you get down to real junk equipment all the stuff out there can give you exceptional sound IF it's in the right hands.
Get a really good person and use whatever they like to use. That is how you will get the best sound.
Oh and then get a good post person ;~)