[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Sonosax SX-R4

Subject: Re: Sonosax SX-R4
From: "emil klotzsch" onomatopoetik
Date: Sat Jun 11, 2011 1:09 pm ((PDT))
hi David,
thanks for the answer.

what makes me curious is why everybody buys sound devices and not a
sonosax. it seems to be high quality and they are a bit cheaper than
the SD.. (at leats when you need 4 preamp channels.)
i understand that for production sound it features do not compare to
the sound devices (thats what i heared), but thats not important for
us nature recordists.
so maybe the pre amps are a little bit more noisy?
most likely not, but what about the "sound" from the pre amps?

isn=B4t there anybody here tryed them both?

all the best

Am 11.06.2011 um 19:49 schrieb davimon100:

> Hi Emil,
> I am fortunate enough to own a Sonosax SX-R4. What can I tell you
> that you can't otherwise find out from data spec. sheets?
> It's under a kilo in weight, is the size of a good read in
> paperback, has 4 XLR inputs with lovely quiet preamps, and up to 8
> channels are possible if used with a mixer or digital input. It's
> easy to use, being particularly easy to start recording (it wakes in
> a state of pause).
> To look at it you'd be forgiven for thinking there wasn't much too
> it. Unlike the SD suite the SX-R4 gives a minimalist light show.
> Channels can be paired and ganged and matrixed. One of the moans
> leveled at it - that metadata could not be edited in the unit - has
> just been addressed in the latest firmware update. Mine has a 60Gb
> hard drive and takes CF cards, too. That's plenty for a day in the
> woods. Mono, stereo and polyphonic recordings are supported. It has
> Timecode, too, in case you get to work with a camera.
> I can't compare it's performance to the SD units as I have not used
> one. Some SD users, however, made approving noises when they took it
> for a spin.
> It runs on six AA. I use a Hawk Woods Lithium battery pack, which
> keeps it going for an age, without adding much weight to the sound
> bag.
> It's way better than my current abilities and I hope to deserve it
> soon.
> David
> --- In  emil klotzsch <>
> wrote:
> >
> > hi there,
> > i think the SX-R4 looks very promising.
> > but i would like to know, has anyone here used one?
> > how does ist compare soundwise to a sd7xx?
> > and, are the preamps as quiet as the sd7xx one?
> >
> > would be interesting to know,
> > all the best
> > emil
> >

"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause.

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> Your email settings:
    Digest Email  | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU