> > Have you seen mini-XLRs before? They're pretty common on pro audio
>> equipment for the film industry, like wireless mikes, and Cooper
>> mixers, where they're used for all but the main ins and outs.
>
>I have seen them. But if you notice most nature recordists don't use
>them, and that's the group we are in, which is what I mean. It will mean
>a change of cables for most. I currently have no field equipment that
>uses them. I would expect that studio types that have wandered into the
>group will probably already have been using them some.
I don't think they're used in studio equipment at all. They're good
for field equipment, being small.
>Also, it does not have the more common (for most folks) optical digital
>connections. Only the coax.
Both are consumer formats, but both are fully capable of professional
performance.
>The intended market is fairly obviously the movie/TV crowd. From things
>like the connectors, the sync functions, and so on.
The movie/TV crowd is doing field recording, just as we are! Same
problems, but higher pressure to get it right the first time, bigger
budgets.
>I've nothing against the mini XLR, and actually wish they were what was
>on everything. The current XLR is a hangover from the days when
>equipment was much bigger and should have gone a while back.
It's a good idea. Lemos are great but too small and very expensive.
But I hate wiring the Switchcraft mini-XLR connectors, they're really
tacky, bend-over metal tabs to grip the cable, for example. I can't
wait till Neutrik gets into that form.
-Dan Dugan
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|