A is DR680, B SD702 - if A is the SD702 it has very poor rejection of 50hz =
mains or cabling issue? (9 dB at 50hz worse)
Considering both pre's are at max gain (thus exhibiting their lowest noise)=
and the Mic is 8 dBA self noise? - the ticking clocks are +40something dB =
above the noise which may make it difficult to discriminate the noise, whic=
h is below the mic self noise.
Were trying to determine a 2dB? difference between pre's with 8 dB of mic s=
elf noise on top?
>From 300hz -1000hz, I measured just 0.349 dB difference between the recordi=
ngs. Above 10Khz its around 1.365 dB (Averaged from 2 second sections of th=
e first two) - I'd assume the figures could be from slight gain level diffe=
rences in the recorders.
Note to Dan Dugan, make an XLR plug "PreGenerator" alternate between two or=
four resistive loads at a predetermined rate that can be sold for testing =
pre's.. Ticking clock, distant bird call available as options. :)
Mind you all this is mute if the recorder doesn't do its job of recording, =
which is a shame considering the 680's pre's are this quiet - brings lots o=
f potential for multichannel arrays in the future.
Thank you for the testing.
BR
Mike.
--- In evs <> wrote:
>
> hi rob,
> i=C2=B4m back from berlin now and i saw that you=C2=B4ve posted the compa=
rison.
> great!
> i did not read all the answers, but i heared the comparison, and there is=
a
> clear difference in noise.
> am i right when i say that recorder B is the sound devices and recorder A
> is the 680?
> wheres the MM-1 gone?
>
> can=C2=B4t wait to read the other answers in the list...
> all the best
> emil
>
> On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 21:43:18 -0500, Rob Danielson <> wrote:
> > Paul Jacobson wrote on another string today Aug 17, 2010:
> >
> >>The [Fostex] FR2-LE is a good performer without a mixer in front,
> >>but SQN, Sound Devices, et al are really a step up in sound quality
> >>from prosumer recorders like FR2-LE and [Tascam] HDP2. The list
> >>tends to fixate on self-noise, and while this is important
> >>consideration, once you get to a point where the preamps don't
> >>audibly degrade the mic's a range of other performance factors come
> >>into play. My experience upgrading from a [Tascam] HDP2 to a Sound
> >>Devices 722 was that there was a noticeable improvement i n the
> >>clarity and "preciseness" of the preamps while using the same mic,
> >>so I feel there are definitely overall improvements to be had by
> >>using a mixer in front of a prosumer recorder.
> >
> > Hi--
> > An opportunity for interested ears:
> >
> > As he pondered which professional audio recorder to purchase for his
> > surround recording needs using AT4022's mics, Emil Klotzsch conducted
> > several comparison tests this summer including a Sound Devices 702
> > recorder (same mic pre as the 744T) and a Tascam DR680. I compiled
> > one of these tests into a 3.5 mb QuickTime movie which you can
> > download and play on your computer with QuickTime or a QuickTime
> > compatible player: http://tinyurl.com/2flkpjk
> >
> > Maximum pre gain was used on both recorders. There were a few
> > environmental sounds Emil was unable to eliminate in his urban
> > located studio. Both recorders were operated on battery power for the
> > test. Rob D.
> >
> > QuickTime Player (free, cross-platform) will display the region
> > changes most accurately: http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/
> >
> > Other free QT-Compatible players:
> > VideoLan Player http://www.videolan.org/
> > MPGStream Clip: http://www.squared5.com/
> >
> >
> > --
> >
>
|