The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
New Sound Devices recorders!
Old 14th July 2017
  #181
TJP
Gear Maniac
 
TJP's Avatar
 

The MP6 has 76 dB of Gain! Should be fine. And from what i can see in the tech. specs the diff. in therms of equivalent input noise is +/- 2 dBUFS. Don´t think that this is audible.... but i haven't done a comparison.
Old 14th July 2017
  #182
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by TJP View Post
The MP6 has 76 dB of Gain! Should be fine. And from what i can see in the tech. specs the diff. in therms of equivalent input noise is +/- 2 dBUFS. Don´t think that this is audible.... but i haven't done a comparison.
What weighting are your ears calibrated to: A or C ? I guess it depends which country you live in....so many standards, so little time
Old 14th July 2017
  #183
TJP
Gear Maniac
 
TJP's Avatar
 

The results are a-weighted right? That means it is suited to describe noise floor in relation to quite sources. If there is a difference between 2 dBUFS converter wise, i really don´t think you can hear it. But correct me if i wrong.
Old 14th July 2017
  #184
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TJP View Post
The results are a-weighted right? That means it is suited to describe noise floor in relation to quite sources. If there is a difference between 2 dBUFS converter wise, i really don´t think you can hear it. But correct me if i wrong.
2dB "UFS" doesn't make any sense. Either it's 2dBu or it's 2dBFs. Or it's a typo and you're talking about 2 LUFS?

That said 2dB of difference relating to the same reference level and weighting does make sense to compare.
Old 14th July 2017
  #185
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gusss View Post
According to the specs this has higher input noise but greater dynamic range than the 702T - so which would be better for wildlife recording ?
The one that you have with you!

(Seriously, those specs are practically identical. Why would you need 120dB of dynamic range in the wild anyway unless you want to record a volcano eruption from start to end without any limiting and you're able to play that back on your speakers at original volume. Otherwise: Go out and record, instead of worrying about specs. These are both top notch machines for what you want to do, the MP however is MUCH cheaper. On the other hand the 702 is easier to power from professional batteries that last forever and the 702T has a TC generator. In terms of audio specs you can't go wrong with either machine. It's more about ergonomics and features)
Old 14th July 2017
  #186
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by apple-q View Post
The one that you have with you!

(Seriously, those specs are practically identical. Why would you need 120dB of dynamic range in the wild anyway unless you want to record a volcano eruption from start to end without any limiting and you're able to play that back on your speakers at original volume. Otherwise: Go out and record, instead of worrying about specs. These are both top notch machines for what you want to do, the MP however is MUCH cheaper)
Hhaha good answer. I guess the reason I ask is I do a lot of sound design that involved boosting very quiet sounds to very loud volumes which can make preamp noise noticable . I do a lot of recording in the amazon rainforest and have an interest in recording and then slowing down ultrasonic sounds where preamp noise may be more noticeable (thye can be very quiet and there aint a lot of natural background noise up there - so preamp noise is more relavant) - which is why I think I prefer the 702T as it has a higher sample rate.
Theres research machines - but I prefer something that can be used for general use as well.
Old 14th July 2017
  #187
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gusss View Post
Hhaha good answer. I guess the reason I ask is I do a lot of sound design that involved boosting very quiet sounds to very loud volumes which can make preamp noise noticable . I do a lot of recording in the amazon rainforest and have an interest in recording and then slowing down ultrasonic sounds where preamp noise may be more noticeable (thye can be very quiet and there aint a lot of natural background noise up there - so preamp noise is more relavant) - which is why I think I prefer the 702T as it has a higher sample rate.
Theres research machines - but I prefer something that can be used for general use as well.
The MixPre-6 records at 24/192 and has a published frequency response of 10Hz to 80kHz at that sample rate.

I would imagine that would be suitable for recording and slowing down ultrasonic sounds.

Which software do you use for slowing down your recordings?
Old 14th July 2017
  #188
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by dogmusic View Post
The MixPre-6 records at 24/192 and has a published frequency response of 10Hz to 80kHz at that sample rate.

I would imagine that would be suitable for recording and slowing down ultrasonic sounds.

Which software do you use for slowing down your recordings?
Thats odd - with Niquist you'd expect it to be 96 khz - I guess thats just the +/- 1db. Do you happen to know what this spec is given for the 702 ? I couldnt see it. I use lots and lots of different software to slow sounds down everything from , dont laugh , FLstudio which Ive actually found to be a really useful sound design tool - to programs like MaxMSP. I find Izotope RX5 amazingly useful for seeing and identifying potentially interesting sounds in the ultrasonic range visually - you can slow things down/pitchshift in it too. I also use a few plugins like Pitchwheel from Quikquak.

Last edited by Gusss; 14th July 2017 at 06:20 PM..
Old 14th July 2017
  #189
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gusss View Post
Do you happen to know what this spec is given for the 702 ?
10 Hz–40 kHz, +0.1, -0.5 (gain controls centered), Fs 96 kHz

I don't know if the 40 kHz would be doubled at 192 kHz sample rate. If so, the 702T would be as useful and perhaps quieter than the MP6.

Thanks for the software info.
Old 17th July 2017
  #190
Lives for gear
 
elswhrco's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pauljisaacs View Post
702 line out into the MixPre-6 Aux In 1/8" (set to line) will be absolutely fine. Line out to line in adds negligible noise since not much if any amplification is necessary.
True, but note that the 702 line out isn't a direct analogue out from the source. It will have passed through the 702 digital conversion (A->D then D->A) so you've introduced an extra layer of conversion (and a wee bit of delay).
Old 19th July 2017
  #191
I just got my Mixpre-6 yesterday in time for an audition recording. Decided to use it. So far so good. It is small, but solid. Heavy as a brick. All the buttons have a satisfying heft to them. The screen is very bright, the glowing knobs are hypnotic, and the navigation easy enough to use without having to search the manual. 15 minutes of tinkering and I was able to get the gist of most of the features and options. Headphone mixes and playback are not quite self explanatory though, and will take some reading or some fiddling to understand. I tried powering it via 4 AA's which do not last long and a large USB C power pack which should last for many many hours.

The sound quality is as good as expected. The Wingman app has also just been released for Android also.
Old 19th July 2017
  #192
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by elswhrco View Post
True, but note that the 702 line out isn't a direct analogue out from the source. It will have passed through the 702 digital conversion (A->D then D->A) so you've introduced an extra layer of conversion (and a wee bit of delay).
I was responding to Don S's question of whether the 702 line out could be used with the 1/8" Aux In. It can and with great success. Re AD->DA path, the 702 and MixPre wide dynamic range, low latency converters are more than good enough that most would struggle to hear any effects of conversion in this setup.
Old 20th July 2017
  #193
Lives for gear
 
Don S's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pauljisaacs View Post
I was responding to Don S's question of whether the 702 line out could be used with the 1/8" Aux In. It can and with great success. Re AD->DA path, the 702 and MixPre wide dynamic range, low latency converters are more than good enough that most would struggle to hear any effects of conversion in this setup.
Many thanks! I guess there is no way to know how well this would work other than trying it and hear the amount of added noise from the additional conversion stage.
Old 20th July 2017
  #194
Lives for gear
 
celticrogues's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don S View Post
Many thanks! I guess there is no way to know how well this would work other than trying it and hear the amount of added noise from the additional conversion stage.
Again, I have to say I'm confused why this is such a big deal. The 702 is clearly not the correct tool for the job you are trying to do. It is a recorder, not a mixer, and not an external preamp. It's primary purpose is to record pristine signal, not to pass that signal to other pieces of equipment.

That said, the 702 is an excellently designed piece of gear and therefore you have been given several ways you could use it to accomplish your your goals. Will it be an ideal signal path? No, but the 702 is not designed for that. If you're really so worried about the negligible noise from unbalanced outputs or another conversion stage I'd suggest you invest in a piece of equipment that actually is designed to do what you are trying to do.

-Mike
Old 29th July 2017
  #195
Lives for gear
 
jnorman's Avatar
Two quick questions for those who have used the new units:
1. Can you power the unit using a power bank via USB a and/or c?
2. Do the channel pan controls affect where the signal is recorded, or do the pan controls only affect where the signal goes on the output buss?
Thanks.
Old 29th July 2017
  #196
Lives for gear
 
celticrogues's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnorman View Post
Two quick questions for those who have used the new units:
1. Can you power the unit using a power bank via USB a and/or c?
2. Do the channel pan controls affect where the signal is recorded, or do the pan controls only affect where the signal goes on the output buss?
Thanks.
1. Power is via USB-C only. USB is just for a keyboard connection.

2. The channel pans affect where the signal is recorded on the L-R mix bus (if you choose to record the L-R track). They don't affect the ISO's.

-Mike
Old 7th August 2017
  #197
Try a MixPre 3 last Saturday, but the 4 alkaline will not last 30 minutes, and auto power shutdown did not save the file properly. Fortunately just use it as a spare unit.
Will try a MixPre 6 with L battery adapter later on.
Can't believe this, since the old MixPre last much longer with the same 2 phantom power mic inputs.
Old 7th August 2017
  #198
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 9sbean View Post
Try a MixPre 3 last Saturday, but the 4 alkaline will not last 30 minutes, and auto power shutdown did not save the file properly.
Alkalines are definitely the worst choice of batteries for this machine (and others too!). Get some Sanyo Eneloops. They will last about 2.5 hours with the 4xAA pack.

See here:

https://www.sounddevices.com/tech-no...wering-options

Did you have the latest firmware on board when that happened with the auto-shutdown? What you describe was an issue with the initial v1.00 release.
Old 7th August 2017
  #199
Lives for gear
 

Rechargables, external batts and back them up with a set of Lithiums.
Old 14th August 2017
  #200
TJP
Gear Maniac
 
TJP's Avatar
 

Hey guys, tried to make a forest ambience yesterday with my mp6 and a pair of Beyerdynamics MC-930 in ORTF. And I expected a lot less noise in that setup. I had to bump up the gain quite a lot (around +56 dB gain) and this sounded kinda noisy. Now I dont know if it was the headphone preamp, the preamps of the mp6 or the mc-930 self noise (but they are really quite mics). Or maybe it was a very quite spott.... Anyone has the same impression with the mp6?
Old 14th August 2017
  #201
TJP
Gear Maniac
 
TJP's Avatar
 

Just tested: nothing connected to the preamps, headphone amp cranked up to 72, channels linked: I start hearing preamp noise at +40 (barely noticeable). from +40-50 is the sweet spot I think, up to +56 is still acceptable noise wise. Now if you go beyond that you start trading audible noise for amplification. Going +60 it start getting messy. Personally I wouldn't go beyond +62 (maybe only I a emergency). Don't think that something beyond +68 is usable. Just my first impression. This is just preamp noise without taking into consideration mic-noise. What do you guys think??
Old 14th August 2017
  #202
Lives for gear
 
elswhrco's Avatar
 

The more technically inclined will correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you can test preamp noise in this manner (i.e. with nothing connected to them). They need to be loaded in some way.
Old 14th August 2017
  #203
Lives for gear
 

Yup, you are effectively testing it by connecting a mic with infinite impedance to a 5kΩ (or whatever it is) input.
Old 14th August 2017
  #204
TJP
Gear Maniac
 
TJP's Avatar
 

Ahh okay. thx for clarification
Old 14th August 2017
  #205
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TJP View Post
Hey guys, tried to make a forest ambience yesterday with my mp6 and a pair of Beyerdynamics MC-930 in ORTF. And I expected a lot less noise in that setup. I had to bump up the gain quite a lot (around +56 dB gain) and this sounded kinda noisy. Now I dont know if it was the headphone preamp, the preamps of the mp6 or the mc-930 self noise (but they are really quite mics). Or maybe it was a very quite spott.... Anyone has the same impression with the mp6?
You should not be hearing any MixPre-6 preamp noise - they are exceptionally quiet. Are you sure you don't have unused/unterminated inputs gain and faders turned up?
Old 14th August 2017
  #206
TJP
Gear Maniac
 
TJP's Avatar
 

Just the mc-930 plugged into preamps 1+2 in linked mode. Channels 5+6 turned off. Channels 3+4 faders turned off. channels 1+2 gain +56 and faders 0 (unity). Don't know if the mics are the cuspids or maybe the cables.... need to find out how to get better results... maybe I´ll test other mics...
Old 14th August 2017
  #207
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TJP View Post
maybe I´ll test other mics...
Yes, the MC930 isn't a particularly quiet mic at, I think, 16dBA, so if you really want to hear the quietness of the Mixpre3/6 preamps, try something with much lower self-noise, such as the budget Rode NT1 (4.5dBA). I agree with Paul from SD that the preamps are, indeed, exceptionally quiet.

Cheers,

Roland
Old 15th August 2017
  #208
TJP
Gear Maniac
 
TJP's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by norfolksoundman9 View Post
Yes, the MC930 isn't a particularly quiet mic at, I think, 16dBA, so if you really want to hear the quietness of the Mixpre3/6 preamps, try something with much lower self-noise, such as the budget Rode NT1 (4.5dBA). I agree with Paul from SD that the preamps are, indeed, exceptionally quiet.

Cheers,

Roland
Strange hearing kinda the opposite of it:

"Very Low Self-Noise, Extraordinary Signal-to-Noise Ratio (71 dB)"
"I use a pair of these in ORTF configuration, connected to a Sound Design 702T for field sound effects recording. They're virtually noise free with great sensitivity and lend themselves extremely well to this task."

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/revi...l#post10990895

Here is an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U__8oo11oto

They are recommended on the field recordings buyers guide: Field Recording Gear Buyer’s Guide | Creative Field Recording

The guy from soundbits uses them for ambient recording (apparently quite successful): https://soundbits.de/product/collect...iences-series/

This is a little test recording I made. No postproduction: https://soundcloud.com/danny-garcia-...ain_pass_bywav

So where do you got the info that these mics are particularly noisy??

Last edited by TJP; 15th August 2017 at 06:26 AM..
Old 15th August 2017
  #209
Lives for gear
 
Earcatcher's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by TJP View Post
Strange hearing kinda the opposite of it:

"Very Low Self-Noise, Extraordinary Signal-to-Noise Ratio (71 dB)"
"I use a pair of these in ORTF configuration, connected to a Sound Design 702T for field sound effects recording. They're virtually noise free with great sensitivity and lend themselves extremely well to this task."

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/revi...l#post10990895

Here is an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U__8oo11oto

They are recommended on the field recordings buyers guide: Field Recording Gear Buyer’s Guide | Creative Field Recording

The guy from soundbits uses them for ambient recording (apparently quite successful): https://soundbits.de/product/collect...iences-series/

This is a little test recording I made. No postproduction: https://soundcloud.com/danny-garcia-...ain_pass_bywav

So where do you got the info that these mics are particularly noisy??
16dBA of self noise (Beyerdynamic's spec sheet) is not particularly quiet, at least not for low level signals. Even a fairly standard acting Schoeps MK8/CMC6 already has a signal to noise ratio of 79dBA. 8dBA and lower of self noise is what I consider very low for microphones.

Assuming the -15dB pad was not on, BTW?
Old 15th August 2017
  #210
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TJP View Post
So where do you got the info that these mics are particularly noisy??
As Earcatcher says the 16dBA is from the manufacturers own specs, so it isn't just a matter of opinion that they are not especially quiet mics. They should be fine for a lot of field recording (indeed I often use 15dBA mics for the same), but for very quiet sounds or when trying to evaluate the self-noise of preamps (as your point re the Mixpre 6), then they are evidently not the best.

For an example - with discussion - of field-recording using lower-noise mics and, by chance, a very happy user of the Mixpre-6 see: https://fieldrecording.net/tag/rode-nt1a/ (I think you will find this a useful site).

Cheers,

Roland
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+  Submit Thread to Reddit Reddit 
 
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump