--- In "Avocet" <> wrote:
>
> < I've sort of settled on the following spec. and was hoping the
> > group could give it the once over and make any suggestions re- >
> > omissions / alternatives etc.
>
> Rob,
>
> While you are at it, aim for something which is not curently available
> and more than 2 channels.
>
> My immediate comparison would be with an SQN mixer running into a
> stereo recorder. I've used SQN mixers since they came out decades ago
> and their spec is high. My first change would be to have four inputs
> as I am using four at the moment with alternative stereo mic pairs.
>
> > switchable front end gain 30/40/50/60dB
>
> And line in 100mv and +12 balanced.
>
> > 2 x analogue fader control. mute to +20dB(gangable for stereo)
>
> Fader 1 ganged L/R with fader 2 pan. Configurable as M-S.
> The other two inputs could have phase switching.
>
> Alternatively make all level controls electronic/digital and
> configurable to all of the above.
>
> > separate MS decoders for input and headphones (width control on
> > input)
>
> And line out. Software control of in/out signals can make this fully
> configurable.
>
> > analogue peak limiter (gangable for stereo)
>
> Make this digital. With 24 bit, a limiter is redundant as you can have
> several bits of headroom. For those rooted in analogue recording,
> provide a limiter but one which can be "undone" digitally. Avoid a
> hole after a peak by making recovery fast which is possible digitally.
>
> > pre-record buffer (5 sec. ?)
>
> 1 minute to 10 minutes. Think big.
>
> > internal solid state drive 128 GB (FAT32)
>
> Pluggable?
>
> > 2 x XLR-3F audio in
>
> 4 as above.
>
> Alternatively, make it stackable to a number of stereo pairs under a
> single sync control. Top layer controls whole stack.
>
> > -40 / +80 deg.C operating temp.
>
> And water/rain resistant. Much more important than 80 C.
>
> David
>
> David Brinicombe
> North Devon, UK
> Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum - Ambrose Bierce
>
David, what you've outlined above is pretty well exactly what I would prefe=
r, but, and I wasn't going to mention it, is that as of a few years ago sin=
ce a reshuffle, I am now the sole designer at SQN (been there 30 years!) an=
d don't want any product conflict. Although the initial plan was to make on=
e for myself, I did envisage making a few available to the group 'at cost'.
Now, that said, SQN have a mult-channel all singing all dancing recorder in=
the pipeline which far exceeds what we're talking of here, so perhaps I ca=
n rethink 'one for the group'.
Rob
p.s. your favourable comments towards SQN over the years are appreciated an=
d haven't gone unnoticed.
|