naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Small Recorder

Subject: Re: Small Recorder
From: "Martyn Stewart" mijdog2000
Date: Mon Apr 14, 2014 9:22 pm ((PDT))
The 702 is the same as the 722 but without the hard drive but that option i=
s still better than your mixy and D50 together in my humble opinion.
The 664 works out far more expensive and heavier than the mixy and the D-50=
 put together but the 664 is far more versatile than your setup being that =
it has camera returns and can record simultaneously to two cards and is a m=
ultichannel recorder as well as an excellent mixer in one. The newer 663 ho=
wever is a lot more compact and lighter than your set-up and becomes a 6 ch=
annel recorder as well as a top grade mixer with equally outstanding mic-pr=
es..
I have the 722/788t/664. I've never thought weight a problem even with a oc=
t box carrying 8 lectrosonic receivers in the same bag... Try using the por=
tabrace harness, it distributes the weight brilliantly!
The main thing though is how you feel with the set-up that suites you best,=
 sorry I confused what you had stated but I still believe Sound Devices are=
 a tough act to beat....

Happy recordings.....








Martyn
*************************************
Martyn Stewart
www.naturesound.org
www.soundofcritters.com

Redmond  WA
425-898-0462

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

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