Let's compare the HHB Portadisc, introduced in 2000 and arguably
the best field recorder of the last five years, and the Sound
Devices 722, the new recorder that many think is today's best
field companion.
These two great recorders have many characteristics in common:
--excellent build quality;
--controls designed with field use in mind;
--great pre-amp section, with EIN around -120dBu;=20
--pro mic support, with XLR and 48v phantom power;
--accurate input level meters;
--pre-roll buffer;
--mic and line analog inputs, plus analog line out;
--digital input and output; and
--standard battery set which provides 2.5 to 3 hours of
recording time.
The area where the two recorders differ most is in their
approach to analog-to-digital conversion and storage. The
Portadisc digitizes at a rate of 16/44.1 (CD standard quality).=20
The digital stream is next analyzed and compressed using
Sony's ATRAC 4.5 algorithms. The resulting data is written
to standard minidisc. Each minidisc can hold 80 minutes of
two-channel recordings.
The 722, introduced in 2004, digitizes at rates up to
24/192 (DVD-A Advanced Resolution). The data is saved in
uncompressed form on an internal hard disc. The disc can
hold many hours of two-channel recordings. For example, a
two-channel 24/192 recording fills up 4GB of disc space per
hour. So a 40GB disc can hold 10 hours of recordings.
The 722 is also more compact, and about 700g (24oz) lighter
than the Portadisc with the standard battery set. This
difference is noticeable if you're carrying the recorder all day.
Last, one can't overlook the pride of ownership engendered
by the 722. Compared to the Portadisc, the 722 feels very
sturdy and business-like.
Unfortunately, the 722 is also about $1000 more expensive
than the Portadisc (street price $1350 vs $2350).
Does this extra expense result in better recordings? Since few
field recordings will be distributed in DVD format, won't most
of the advantages of high bit rate digitizing be lost when
converted to CD format? Recording under field conditions
often dulls the technical advantage of fancy equipment.
To answer these questions, it would be helpful to review
cuts recorded on both Portadisc and 722 under the same
conditions. Can anyone provide samples? Who among us
has access to both recorders?
--oryoki
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|