>Dan Dugan wrote:
>> Greg Weddig wrote,
>>
>>
>>>I hope this isn't old news, I know quite a few of you use this; looks
>>>like they are keeping parts in stock though...
>>>
>>>http://www.sounddevices.com/news/mp2-disc.htm
>>
>>
>> I was disappointed by this; the MP-2 was my best-selling Sound
>> Devices product. Apparently it was the lowest-selling product for
>> them. Oh, well.
>>
>> The MixPre has exactly the same preamps and headphone amp. It doesn't
>> have the MS decoder, but it does allow you to put one mike on both
>> channels, which the MP-2 couldn't do.
>
>Actually you could, put the MP-2 into MS decoding, plug the mic into the
>left channel (like it was the mid). Crank the other channel to zero and
>adjust the gain with the left channel control. It will come out on both
>channels evenly.
>
>I'm also disappointed, and glad I already got one. I bought for the M/S
>decoder, so the mixpre is not even in the running. I also have no use
>for USB in field recording. I'm not about to suffer with a laptop out there.
>
>Had they priced it a little lower they would have had lots of sales. I'm
>sure lots of people looked at it and then bought something cheaper.
>
>Walt
>
>
Thanks for the tip Dan. I guess its the price paid for the Lundahl
transformers that keeps the cost fairly high, or so Jerry Chamakis
who hand-makes a similar mic pre once told me. Could even be that
the m-s decode circuitry is still on the card of the Mix Pre, just
not hooked up or even wired to create a mixer function as Walt
suggests. Now, for folks who now want to monitor/encode m-s, its
absence in the Mix Pre helps justify a big jump to the $3K model 442.
This is kind of poor tier construction in my opinion because, as far
as I know, "stereo," is still pretty much a post-production creation
in most portable film/video productions. Some live TV shows, notably
sports, bother with stereo background ambiance and they probably use
consoles, not portable mic pres. M-S encoding/monitoring WAS a vote
for the MP-2 over the other medium to higher cost units.
That being said, Sound Devices is a very small company and that in
itself is an accomplishment these days. I hope the 722 and 744T are
still planned as basic, fairly affordable units,.. their release has
been delayed.
Walt, There are 8,353 posts in my nat recordists mailbox. I
appreciate everything you say about portability and simplicity in the
field because good recordings rely on so many factors coming
together,.. but I'll bet that before there are 16,706 posts, you'll
will be recording on a 24 bit, compact device that does not require
real time transfers to get to your Mac. In the meanwhile, I'll still
appreciate your warnings about taking laptops into the field. Even
hhb portadiscs eventually need repair. Best--Rob D.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|