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
Sound Devices Scorpio, 36 tracks recorder Recorders, Players & Tape Machines
Old 2 days ago
  #91
AB3
Lives for gear
 

Thank you. Done. Now no quotes of trolls please.

Let's move on to any actual information about the Scorpio and any real uses that come up.
Old 2 days ago
  #92
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by celticrogues View Post
No, she listened to the smaller devices and wasn’t happy with their sound, and then assumed that all of their products along several different product lines, with at least 6 different preamp designs, including a new design that no one has actually heard yet, would all sound the same.

That’s just foolish and irresponsible.

-Mike
No. Wrong. Completely. Listened and used every Sound Devices Recorder model made. The gang violence of people with an opposite opinion than “the group think” is so schizo.
Old 2 days ago
  #93
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AB3 View Post
Well said. This thread is about a new product that no one on this thread has heard and sound devices has indicated that it is a new preamp, both smoother and quieter - what does that mean? Who the heck knows until one tries it!

quote: "even smoother sound with the lowest noise of any preamp in Sound Devices 20-year history."

So, I will be curious to hear what this really sounds like.
Don’t you think they would say more transparent, uncolored if that were the case? Of course they would, but they didn’t. Because it isn’t. So, typical Sound Devices with a smoother and quieter stuffy nose.
Old 2 days ago
  #94
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
i got no problem if you don't like some gear but pls stop making hilarious claims: gear is agnostic of genre, glorious music has been recorded on sd gear (and possibly with schoeps mics...) by engineers who may have even better hearing than you and who are very well respected not only by our little community but by a large audience - what doesn't work for you seems to work very well for others!

so please get off this/any thread dealing with sound devices (and schoeps) gear if you think it performs so poor or you risk being ridiculed/ignored by various gz members...
That is so 7th grade...”we think this and everyone here agrees with me”. I can be the only voice (I am not as Gearslutz has members who have agreed and independently shared the same experience with both Schoeps and Sound Devices) doesn’t mean I am the wrong voice. Plus, sound is subjective. How many orchestral and soundtrack recording were made with Sound Device preamps and received awards? Zero. I rest my case.
Old 2 days ago
  #95
Lives for gear
 
surflounge's Avatar
The little knobs set input, and big knobs mix to buss?
Seems backwards for music recording remote work.
Rather twist big knobs to set levels for recording tracks individually.
Please correct if misunderstood it.
Old 2 days ago
  #96
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimjazzdad View Post
Helena,

You have cast your opinions widely and repeated in this forum. We all know your opinion on Schoeps mics and SD preamps; you accomplish nothing further by crusading against the use of these devices by others. You say you don't respect anybody who uses SD for acoustic music... The people who contribute positively to this forum do so in a spirit of mutual respect; by not respecting others, you disqualify yourself from the respect of the rest of us here. We don't have to agree on everything but we do have to respect that others are entitled to the opinions they have formed based on their experiences. Your disrespect of others here is what has placed your opinions on "deep discount".

Respectfully,
Jim Legere
My opinion is not being respected. Everything you wrote is an accurate illustration of everybody who disagrees with me. If you don’t like my opinion, accept your hate and individuality and ignore or disagree. Attacking is so brainless. That being said, I mirror communications. Don’t like my communications, then change yours. #mirror
Old 2 days ago
  #97
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by celticrogues View Post
Amen to that.

-Mike
“Troll”: Anybody who disagrees and defends themselves when attacked.
Old 2 days ago
  #98
Quote:
Originally Posted by apple-q View Post
Yes? Who? Battery powered? With 16 MicPres and everything light enough to carry around your neck a whole day?
Not just that! Does it also have.....

Timecode.

Metadata.

Control surface.

Superslot compatibility.

Dante

AES

Android / iOS app

Tonnes of outputs

Multiple powering options

etc etc etc


So so so many reasons why a person would buy a Scorpio!

I know I desperately want one.... :-(

But am going to wait for a "Scorpio Micro" which hopefully is almost identical but with a lower channel count and a lower price as well
Old 2 days ago
  #99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
Your argument seem to imply that a computer based situation is inherently unreliable or less than optimal, and that is what I find fault with. Many professional recording trucks use computer/DAW based recording systems in critical situations everyday. Plus a digital stand alone recorder is not immune to failures, the important thing is to have an appropriate backup scheme in place whatever your system of choice.

This is not aimed at being used in a truck or in a studio.

Scorpio is instead perfectly positioned to straddle the worlds of both bag and cart work, doing both wonderfully.


And yes, all pro mixers would have a back up recorder (even if it is just in the car boot) at handy, be it a Zoom F8, or a 744, or a 633, or whatever.
Old 1 day ago
  #100
Gear Guru
As the owner of a MixPre I'm very happy music recording with it. If I want character I patch in a different preamp at line level. The preamps seem to be clear and detailed, and the conversion on par. Obviously there is "better" gear, but I'm floored at the quality and price point. I would never expect a portable $1K unit to be the pinnacle for orchestral recording, as an all in one solution.....BUT the unit makes very good professional grade recordings, and has amazing build quality....

Scorpio seems to be aiming at a different market. I can't take seriously people complaining about price. On one hand you have someone dissing the quality of pres (they've never heard), and on the other, you've got someone complaining about price (that works out to relatively little per channel), comparing to an interface (which makes no sense).

I would be surprised if they don't add overdub capability. SD seems to do things in well thought out increments. The Wingman app and addition of viable control surfaces was huge with the MixPre series. It will be really interesting to follow this product's evolution.
Old 1 day ago
  #101
Lives for gear
 
boojum's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by HelenaBzg View Post
Anybody who thinks Sound Devices pres are quality for acoustic music has poor ears and I do not respect.
You might want to hold off on that judgement until after you have reviewed the extensively tested double-blind of a 788T against a Nagra. I forget which model Nagra. Many, many people were sure that the Nagra was better. None of them could tell which recorder was which, until they were told and then they knew it all the time. Please review the tests and see if you can tell which is which. And try to have some respect for the folks on this board. You aren't the only genius in the universe, you know.
Old 1 day ago
  #102
AB3
Lives for gear
 

Fairly certain it was the Nagra VI. And, Sound Devices claims this pre will be better - so I do not know why anyone would consider it reasonable to judge it before it is even in anyone's hands! Cheers!

Quote:
Originally Posted by boojum View Post
You might want to hold off on that judgement until after you have reviewed the extensively tested double-blind of a 788T against a Nagra. I forget which model Nagra. Many, many people were sure that the Nagra was better. None of them could tell which recorder was which, until they were told and then they knew it all the time. Please review the tests and see if you can tell which is which. And try to have some respect for the folks on this board. You aren't the only genius in the universe, you know.
Old 1 day ago
  #103
Quote:
Originally Posted by AB3 View Post
Fairly certain it was the Nagra VI. And, Sound Devices claims this pre will be better - so I do not know why anyone would consider it reasonable to judge it before it is even in anyone's hands! Cheers!
I am very confident on the pre quality. The only thing I would expect: Some XLR5, 7, and/or 10-pin input sockets for stereo/VR/array/DMS microphones.
Old 1 day ago
  #104
I mean, I’ve made some really beautiful recordings with a Yamaha MG mixer and my Schoeps and AKG mics, and I know I’m not alone here in working with cheaper tools and being more than happy with the results. I think that some mics work better than others in this circumstance, and some kinds of ensembles more flattered than others.

It’s important to have consistent, reliable tools that meet certain objective criteria, but often I feel that engineers I know are getting into their own heads too much about gear, like a trumpeter obsessing about leadpipes and brace placement: they can make a difference, but they are so rarely game changers, more likely to put the player at ease than to make a noticeable difference for the audience and ensemble around them, or even affect their own objective technical abilities. That has its value, certainly, but there are cheaper ways to find confidence.

A friend of mine said it best to me the other day: “The marginal increases in performance are not nearly as dramatic as tilting a microphone a few degrees.”
Old 16 hours ago
  #105
A failure to achieve acceptable results is rarely the fault of the equipment. Especially at the level of Sound Devices and Schoeps. If something sounds wrong in one of my recordings, I chide myself, I don't chuck the equipment.

My only problem with the new SD preamps is the noise level at higher gain. (Above 40dB) A problem if using any type of ribbon mic, active or passive . It looks like the Scorpio is boasting quieter Pres so hopefully they handle the higher gain settings with less hiss.
Old 16 hours ago
  #106
Gear Guru
What I find a bit shocking is people on GS who have perfectly fine equipment far beyond the capabilities of what was on offer in the "old days", and then pointing to classic recordings as the gold standard. Obviously there is uber great gear for a reason, but unless you are working on the highest level, it really isn't relevant. Great recordings have been made with a lot less sonic firepower.

There are people on here who truly have golden ears and engineering skills. I do value their opinions and if I was recording the London symphony on location, would probably have a remote truck rented (anything less would probably get me fired). Any pro realizes the cost of the equipment is a fairly small line item in an overall budget. I see SD recorders all the time on film sets and real sound guys love them. Build quality and sonics are key. Nagra Sonosax Aaton are all respected names. Those should be the benchmarks this is judged against, not some theoretical setup. Location recorders that people are actually using effectively in conditions ranging from from an arctic wasteland to steaming jungle .......
Old 16 hours ago
  #107
Eh, be careful assuming that, it’s not really the case. Lewis Layton was using U47’s, Bob Fine Schoeps 201’s, Decca had a custom WSW console in Vienna... Most gear used on professional recordings of that early stereo era was of very high quality, even for the smaller labels.

Their limitations were mostly in the fidelity of their recording medium, which was still very good by the late 50s, and in monitoring, which did take longer to improve to a modern standard. But mics, pres, consoles.... this was the era of one off tools, when the best kit that we admire now was being invented and put through its paces.

I’d reckon that most of the inferior sound you’ll find on records of this time can be traced to antiquated technique, not to the lower quality of gear.




Quote:
Originally Posted by ardis View Post
What I find a bit shocking is people on GS who have perfectly fine equipment far beyond the capabilities of what was on offer in the "old days", and then pointing to classic recordings as the gold standard. Obviously there is uber great gear for a reason, but unless you are working on the highest level, it really isn't relevant. Great recordings have been made with a lot less sonic firepower.

There are people on here who truly have golden ears and engineering skills. I do value their opinions and if I was recording the London symphony on location, would probably have a remote truck rented (anything less would probably get me fired). Any pro realizes the cost of the equipment is a fairly small line item in an overall budget. I see SD recorders all the time on film sets and real sound guys love them. Build quality and sonics are key. Nagra Sonosax Aaton are all respected names. Those should be the benchmarks this is judged against, not some theoretical setup. Location recorders that people are actually using effectively in conditions ranging from from an arctic wasteland to steaming jungle .......
Old 15 hours ago
  #108
Gear Guru
Quote:
Originally Posted by king2070lplaya View Post
Eh, be careful assuming that, it’s not really the case. Lewis Layton was using U47’s, Bob Fine Schoeps 201’s, Decca had a custom WSW console in Vienna... Most gear used on professional recordings of that early stereo era was of very high quality, even for the smaller labels.

Their limitations were mostly in the fidelity of their recording medium, which was still very good by the late 50s, and in monitoring, which did take longer to improve to a modern standard. But mics, pres, consoles.... this was the era of one off tools, when the best kit that we admire now was being invented and put through its paces.

I’d reckon that most of the inferior sound you’ll find on records of this time can be traced to antiquated technique, not to the lower quality of gear.
I'm not assuming that recording on the highest level in the past was inferior, indeed a lot of what made magical recordings then, simply doesn't exist today.

What bothers me is you have accessible gear today that engineers were striving for then. No noise incredible headroom and crystal clear sonics. Even in relatively prosumer equipment you have amazing specs. You can get 2 channels of a Decca preamp today for what, under $500-?

Your point to technique is a great one. Honestly if you can't get great sound out of Sound Devices/Schoeps (insert name here) gear, I really wonder why....

For all the pinnacle gear you listed there were hundreds of guys working with Tascam, Otari, Revox, Sony, gear with OK boards and mic choices, who got wonderful recordings. Obviously talking different genres and time periods, but the point is, I'm pretty shocked at how amazing the feature set/price point of this new recorder is.

I can't imagine any competent engineer not being able to make first rate recordings with it. Again, a unit that fits in a briefcase, and can literally go anywhere in the world.....
Old 7 hours ago
  #109
Lives for gear
 
boojum's Avatar
Venue

I'm not sure if this has been in the thread but venue can kill the best gear and sanctify the worst. I have read it often that it is the space which is being recorded. And some of those venues are wonderful. CBS had that old church (Armenian?) in Manhattan where a lot of good music was recorded. And we have all been presented with venues of "great acoustics" which is only rarely true. But a good space makes good results more likely.

And as for SD + Schoeps, they have been lucky for me more than once. I've read of other folks, professional folk, who have had the same results.
Old 7 hours ago
  #110
Gear Head
 

Thanks for such a clear, insightful remark... a different category of recordist than most here as I do mostly documentary work, though having recorded lots of dialogue and a bit of music this rings true for me. A lovely voice singing in a quiet field and the air was a blessing, sweet recordings with little effort ( a schoeps and a 744t did the heavy lifting). As for dialogue, again a soft room or a quiet meadow and voices are startlingly lovely, its in the tricky spaces that most craft is needed.
Old 5 hours ago
  #111
Quote:
Originally Posted by boojum View Post
You might want to hold off on that judgement until after you have reviewed the extensively tested double-blind of a 788T against a Nagra. I forget which model Nagra. Many, many people were sure that the Nagra was better. None of them could tell which recorder was which, until they were told and then they knew it all the time. Please review the tests and see if you can tell which is which. And try to have some respect for the folks on this board. You aren't the only genius in the universe, you know.
I could say the same about Sound Devices vs Zoom F series....
Old 5 hours ago
  #112
Quote:
Originally Posted by IronFilm View Post
I could say the same about Sound Devices vs Zoom F series....
Yes and no... F8 got only 2 analog out, difficult to be backup by other devices. However, it is a perfect backup recorder which save my life once.
Old 3 hours ago
  #113
Lives for gear
 
boojum's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by IronFilm View Post
I could say the same about Sound Devices vs Zoom F series....
David, you could say it, but I do not believe that the Zoom and the 788T were extensively double-blind tested on this board. So now the comparison resolves to a matter of opinion. The double-blind 788T - Nagra VI tests were done scrupulously with a number of microphones to remove that bias. I'm not going to recount the test comments because SD - Nagra is such a tender subject. Suffice it to say that one group of fan-boys was pretty red-faced. I worked for over twenty years in the computer business (software) and can guarantee you that one test is worth a thousand opinions.
Old 1 hour ago
  #114
Lives for gear
You'll find comparisons such as these on YouTube which illustrate differences in noise performance for example: >>>YouTube

....but few which test exhaustively and consistently using double blind methods, so the conclusions tend to be of the "yes, there are differences...but they're all reasonably good if you watch your gain structure" type.
Old 15 minutes ago
  #115
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9sbean View Post
Yes and no... F8 got only 2 analog out, difficult to be backup by other devices. However, it is a perfect backup recorder which save my life once.
Actually it has a total of four outputs I can control and send anything to.

Which when compared to the Sound Devices MixPre6 (the SD product which is the same price as a F8) that is far more with the F8
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
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Zen MD / So much gear, so little time
5
liam017 / Connectors, cables, stands and accessories
1
njrsound / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music and Location Recording
11
aliasforinfo / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music and Location Recording
3
maestro / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music and Location Recording
45

Forum Jump
Forum Jump