Thanks for this video, Curtis! "Buying expensive recorders doesn't solve that problem (of room noise)". That is exactly my problem. I always have to turn off the fridge. Recently, I also obstruct the mechanical ventilation when I shoot videos. I also have a lot of reverbs and I didn't know about sound blankets. I need to look more into this. I don't know if you'll read this but if you do and have the time to reply: if I hang those blankets on some support (not on the wall, it's not possible), will it have the same effect and reduce reverb? Thanks a lot!
Hi Pierre, yes, I often hang the sound blankets on century stands. Not sure whether you've already seen this but here's another episode I did where we covered sound blankets: ruclips.net/video/uzyEaVYCk3s/видео.html Best wishes!
Thanks for the reply, Curtis! No, I haven't seen this other video yet. Thanks for the link! I'm going to watch it now as I need to rest (making subtitles is a tiring task :D). Best wishes too! :))
Great comparison! The 633 sounds really nice... darn lol. Would running a Sound Devices MM-1 into a Zoom F8 achieve the SD sound for that channel (say for a boom)?
633 clearly sounds much fuller deeper and richer, followed by the mix pre and then the zoom sounds flat and almost "hollowed out" compared to the others.
I'm a little surprised how much better the 633 still is compared to the MixPre. The Zoom is not in the same league at all to my ears. The MixPre might be EQ'ed to sound a bit more like the 633 regarding depth/richness/warmth/smoothness.
What boom/stand (pictured at 0:37) are you using with the overhead mic? It's now a year later, what brand of boom/stand(s) would you recommend be considered? Thanks!
Hi Dan, that's a pricey conglomeration of several things: K-Tek Avalon KEG150CCR Graphite boom pole with internal coiled cable: bhpho.to/2icrx4E C-Stand: bhpho.to/2JsTAIz Boom Holder/Adapter: bhpho.to/2ss4WCG
Great comparison. I'm currently using the Zoom H5 and I'm happy with it. Do you think it is worth upgrading to the Mix Pre-3 if I plan to buy Sennheiser MKH416 mic in the future?
If you've got the budget and you record often, I definitely think this is a worthwhile upgrade! But don't expect night and day difference unless you've got all the other elements of good recording in order (managing noise and reverb, mic placement, gain staging, etc.) Good luck!
Hello again Chris, I just purchased the Panasonic S1H Camera. My goal is to create and film a Feature I can present to Netflix. I currently have the Rode NTG 1 and the H4N... If you would please tell me if what I have is good enough for 1 home location film... 3 actors speaking at a time no more. Or could you point me to the most inexpensive solution for both mic and field record to make this project sound great?
I thought the difference in bass response was rather strange, so I compared the first two preamplifiers in the silence part. This is the part examined in forensics to see if recordings coming from different sources were edited together and masked in some way in a final step:) The signal level of the Zoom noise is about 3dB lower in power, but that can happen on power normalization. The strange thing is that the bass response is unnaturally weak on the zoom f8 noise floor. Many dB lower than normal below 120Hz. The Zoom noise floor's most powerful part is at over 100Hz, while it is much lower in frequency on the first preamp. The noise response bass roloff is almost parallel, but extends lower in frequency. The noise floor does not change in actual rooms and electronic noise sources. It sounds like a highpass and it looks like a highpass in spectrum analysis, so I would say that highpass filter was active on the signal path of the zoom during this recording and it was rather high in frequency.
Curtis- Question relating to the SD Mix Pre-6 and 3 and the 633. I am finally pulling the string on purchasing new audio recorders(This weekend - for work starting 7-10-17). I would have already bought the Mix Pre-6, but everyone is out of stock. I looked with great detail in the last several of days at the Zoom F8 ( I like the features and the 8 inputs - do not like the headphone amp, limiters or HP filter - workflow is ok at best) , because I really need those extra inputs, and the SD 633. 1) I cannot get a straight answer from the SD distributors for what use is the 633's TA inputs and how I can convert them to XLR inputs. That could be a solution. 2) I can get a Mix Pre-3 now and then get the 6 in a few weeks when they are in stock. How much of a workflow issue would this be in your opinion using both recorders with a two camera system (GH5's) and syncing them all up? There will be times (50%), that I will only need 3 or 4 inputs. Thank You!! Stu Schnurman (BTW - Bic Raven is the company)
+Bic Raven hi Stu, the three TA line inputs on the 633 are usually used to take a line level signal, often from wireless systems. You can also put a mini preamp in front to add mic inputs. Mozegear makes the mini papi and Sound Devices makes the MM1. Syncing sound from two different recorders is certainly possible, but can be a little heavy. You would lose the ability to create a full mix unless you take up a channel or two feeding a mix from one to the other. I think you'd be in a better situation with the F8 if you need that many channels. You might consider renting an F8 or 633 to see how they each work hands-on. Good luck!
Your lighting is really good, dang! Also thanks for the comparison video! Honestly they were all impressively quiet, and sounded good in their own way. To me the F8 sounded a bit sterile, which isn't necessarily bad, the 633 sounded warm, and the MixPre seemed somewhere in between. I wonder if buying something like the Sound Devices MM-1 preamp and sending that to the line in of the zoom would give not only an analogue limiter, but the Sound Devices tone?
+Chris Fuchs thanks! My sense is that the timbre of recorded sound is due mostly to the mic and preamp and then a small contribution from the analogue to digital converter (which would be in the F8). So I'd bet that with the MM1 and F8, it'd sound pretty close to the MixPre or 633. I'll need to try that some time.
Curtis I've been binge watching your videos on the Mixpres and the F series and still can't make my decision so I'll ask your professional opinion. For commercial voice over work that will be conducted in a whisper room on a Sennheiser 416 which do you believe would be best? Or if you have another great suggestion under, or near, the $1000 range I'd consider that. Your videos are SO thorough and non biased that it's truly amazing btw, so thank you.
Hi Robbie, thanks. The Zoom F4 or SD MixPre-3 would be enough inputs since it is just the one microphone. I personally prefer the sound of the MixPre preamps so the MixPre-3 would probably be my choice. Presumably you will power the recorder via AC rather than battery. If so, that's a +1 for the Zoom which comes with an AC adapter. You'd have to buy that for the MixPre. The MixPre has better limiters so if you happen to have occasional transient peaks that are a bit too high in amplitude, the MixPre does a better job handling those. Either one will do a great job. If it helps, I would personally choose the MixPre. Good luck!
Hey Curtis, which device would you recommend for recording a symphony orchestra? In other words, which device has the most musical, sweetest sound? Thank you.
Great Video, thanks that you explained the noise level topic so that ppl don't mix these things up and think they can fix acoustics with expensive gear :) The pre amp of the Sound Device 633 sounded really warm and almost boomy, it doesn't distract and I'm sure in most situations it makes the flat signal very pleasing, but in a comparison like this such warm and low end boosting pre amps always let the more neutral and analytic pre amps look kinda bad. Seen it often when comparing japanese/german pre amps to english/american pre amps :P
Constantin hello. Do you find the preamps of zoom more natural sounding than the mixpre's ones. I hear more definition on mixpre preamps and more high and mid frequencies but I kind of feel that zoom might sound a bit more natural.
It's kinda a japanese thing that sound is more on the analytic side, you get the same with Yamaha Digital Mixers. It gives you a more "real" illustration of the audio, but for production it means it should give you more options, cause there is no coloring in the raw, but in the end you will have to do some warming in post or it could be to harsh for the ear. It's a diffrent approach and you will have to adopt to both sides in the end. It's just good to know what to expect from a product and like with microphones at a certain price point it's not about the technical quality, it's about features and what you prefer in a product for you personal workflow. Think about Shure SM58, it's still in use after all these years and the reason is not the audio quality, it's just that everyone knows how to work that mic so it gives you the result you want.
I agree, in part, though I'd say, in practice the adaptation becomes a question of the shortest distance to the desired end result. I also agree with the Shure mic usage question, though I would opt for the SM57 in a studio setting.
Hey Curtis. I hear a big difference between the zoom f8 and the mixpre 6. The mixpre sounds much warmer. Is this difference also there between the f8n and the mixpre 6 mark 2? Thanks!
The 633 is the previous generation. The new generation is the 833, 888, and Scorpio which are the professional line of recorders. Their preamplifiers are slightly warmer than the MixPre.
Curtis Judd if you search for cuckoomusic on this, he's my other guru for audio tips on RUclips. He covers Namm events etc, for the latest synth gear releases and so forth, pretty cool. Thanks for the response btw, and keep going, your reviews are very helpful
Curtis, how much did the F8n pro improved? With Sony MDR 7509HD headphones, I can clearly hear a difference; Mixpre6 is in a different class than F8 - way cleaner, nicer - and 633 even more so (to the point where it makes me check out the prices but not sure if it's worth it for now).
Thanks a lot for your great review Curtis. I was wondering if it is possible to upload the recordings somewhere where we could download the uncompress audio files. I also wanted to ask for you, that you know the sound of your voice better than us, which preamps sound more clinical, more accurate, more natural to you? Do you think there is more colourisation in some of these preamps? Finally, it would be really insightful if it is possible to make some more recording of different sound sources so we could get a better idea of the preamps timbre and definition.
Thanks Dimitris, I thought that they could be downloaded from Soundcloud but alas, no... I'll have to look for other options. I think the F8 probably sounds more clinical in terms of bass response but the Sound Devices may be more accurate in the higher frequencies. That's just my subjective opinion. I'll see about including some additional recordings in future episodes. Thanks.
Curtis please help me out - WHICH MixPre should I get?? The MixPre6M...or the $100 more other one? Currently I use a Tascam Dr100 MkIII 2 ch recorder( love the built-in rechareable lithium battery) - but i need4-channels here and there PLUS i want better sound. I perform audio-only recordings of music, mainly classical of solo acoustic piano, clarinet, violin, guitar... plus small group ensembles and occasionally of large orchestras. I do not use it as an interface, don't "mix" in the unit ( I transfer the data from the SD card into my laptop and do some mastering with LogicProX.) I MAY add video recording to my offering so usable "timecode" would be nice. Would the 6Mgie me what I need or would I need the $100 more version? I hear a definite MUSICAL quaity difference between both SD's and the F8. I can't deny it to myself....the warmth of "organic aliveness" vrs a colder grittiness from the F8 sound sample and from from SD & F8 recordings I've heard on Gearslutz. I have been thrashing about getting an F4n model ( $449 ) or F8 ( older model being blown off occasionally for only $500 ) vrs a MixPre6 ( mucho bucks with no discount ). ARRRRGH, I really need acknowledge that I'll just have to save up for a MixPre 6...but WHICH VERSION ?? Muchas gracias!!
Excellent as alway! Curtis I’m upgrading from Tascam 70d, but still can’t decide between F6 and MixPre 3, which one you think I’m going to hear the best audio difference. I love the float 32 of f6. I’m a run and gun mode content creator.
If you use the same microphone and position the mic the same way, there shouldn’t be a huge difference in sound unless you gained incorrectly on the Tascam. If is 32-bit float you’re after, both the F6 and MixPre-3 II do that. The F6 is cheaper but the MixPre is more repairable if the unit gets damaged or stops working.
Hey Curtis, does the mixpre-6’s mixing capabilities match that of a recorder accompanied by a dedicated pre-amp mixer like the SD 302, or does the Mixpre-6 serve mainly as a recorder and still needs a dedicated mixer like the SD 302?
Hey! No need for an additional mixer in front of the MixPre, it's got mixing capabilities (basic vs advanced vs custom mode so you can set it up to work they way you prefer to work). There may be ergonomic advantages to other mixers/recorders, but the MixPre CAN do it all on its own.
What would you recommend for a starter mic? XLR is fine, as i have an adapter into 3.5mm.... Im looking for a shotgun style or cardioid.. something that i can use for boom indoors, and a general mic for filming...
thanks, but the videomic pro is above my budget... i was wondering if you knew of any cheap Chinese knock offs? that sound good? the videomicro is in my budget... anything xlr would work too...
Adapting xlr to 3.5mm is tricky because most XLR mics require phantom power and that's not possible via 3.5mm. There is this cheap shotgun microphone that I reviewed which also works pretty well: ruclips.net/video/Ecs0GWaPtto/видео.html
Curtis, what about a test on the F8 limiters vs SD analog limiters please. Im considering selling my F8 and buy the Mixpre 6 but i want to make sure it's worth the switch. Thank you for this informative video!
If limiters are important to your work, definitely go with the MixPre. The F8 and F4 limiters are post digital conversion so nearly useless for preventing clipping when sound over-modulates. HOWEVER, if you haven't run into issues yet, I'm also not sure the switch is justified on that feature alone. You give some things up moving from the F8 to the MixPre while you gain a different set of features on the MixPre. Still planning to do a "which works best for which situations" video at some point.
That video on "Which works best for which situations" is a great idea! In the meantime, I was looking at some stores out there for the MixPre-6 and it looks like it still hasn't been released?? Anyway, I guess I would just need to pre order. Thanks again, Curtis! Love your channel.
Hi Sy, it has definitely been released but the first batch of stock has sold out. Some of the retailers still show it as preorder but I don't think that's entirely accurate. I have one that I purchased from DVeStore.com so they have definitely begun shipping. Not sure why they still say "Preorder."
Hi Curtis, your videos are great. Can you compare Mixpre-6 with Mixpre-D? Even though Mixpre-D has only two inputs and lack of inner recording capability is still more expensive than the other. I asked a Sound Devices technician if the Mixpre-D has "better sound quality" than the other (ignoring inputs etc.) He said: The sound quality of Mixpre-D's components are better than the Mixpre-6. What do you think? Are you agree with that or how big the differences are "in terms of sound quality" for a serious production like broadcast or filmmaking? Thanks.
Hi, I haven't used the MixPre-D so I'm not certain on sound quality differences between the two. Based on my experience with Sound Devices other gear (I mix mainly with a 633), my guess is that it has a slightly warmer low end response. Is it a night and day difference? Not necessarily. As you can hear in this episode, the difference between the MixPre-6 and 633 is detectible on quality speakers or headphones, but not hugely different. I would be more concerned about whether the devices fit the needs of the production. Do they have enough inputs, enough outputs, the right kind of outputs, will we need to send wireless hop to camera, will we need to send wireless feed of the mix to director, script supervisor, etc. In those cases, the MixPre-D may or may not be a better choice. In short: There probably is a very small difference in audio quality for dialogue recording. More important is whether the rest of the features match the needs of the production.
Planning on a video with lots of pro-level lavalier microphones. In the meantime, here are a few: Shure Twinplex: ruclips.net/video/U6Axg0iP6wg/видео.html Voice Technologies VT500: ruclips.net/video/9c74PsslcOk/видео.html Countryman B6: ruclips.net/video/Lh1qVoBieVI/видео.html
I'm planning to put together another video on that. The high level answer is it depends on what is most important to you in the work that you do. I prefer the SD but for others, the F8 is a better option. More to come.
Hi Curtis, looking forward to the Mixpre vs F8 video. I asked you on a different post about using the Mixpre-6 vs F8 just after NAB specifically for field recording (ambient sounds, very soft to extremely loud, instrumental and vocal performances and VO). I was leaning towards the Mixpre-6 for the limiters/pres and worried the F8 would clip during experimenting with louder sound sources in the field. You said in that case to go with the Mixpre-6. Do you still feel that way after having more time with the it? Partly asking because I have a pre-order waiting and want to pull the trigger but still slightly hesitant!
Either of them could produce very nice field recordings. They both seem to have very nice preamps and plenty of dynamic range. If limiters are important to your work (e.g., you only get one shot at recording a particular field sound), then I would go MixPre. I also prefer the knobs/potentiometers on the MixPre. If you'll ever need more inputs or balanced XLR outputs or in-built timecode generator or prefer a more robust external power input, the F8 is a great recorder. I find it's front panel a little crowded and it's knobs definitely on the small side. So you can see there are plusses and minuses for both of them. If I could only choose one, I'd probably go for the MixPre, but that's subjective and based on the type of work I do. I'm sorry I've not been more definitive but this is a case where if there's any way you can try one or both of them before you buy, that'd be ideal. Then you could get a better feel for each before you commit.You can rent a Zoom F8 here, for example: www.lensrentals.com/rent/other-video/camera-support/other-audio And after we post the MixPre review early next week, we'll look at doing a future episode to compare the MixPre-6 and F8. Good luck!
Hi Randall, we had a discussion about that here: ruclips.net/video/_c64B9s0eCA/видео.html In the discussion, we talked about sending the audio to camera, but you can do the same thing to send audio to your boom op.
Hello Curtis, I am a beginner of professional sound recording which is full of passion Could answer me about the deference between trim and fader ? I have tested my equipment which is a zoom F8 and the sennheiser MKH 416-P48u3 shotgun mic but I can't define what are there deference For example, is it the same when I set the Trim at 35db which fader is 0db and the trim at 30 which fader is +5db?
Hello David, Trim is used to raise or amplify the level of the sound signal and a fader is used to attenuate or reduce the level of the sound signal. You usually do not want to amplify with your fader as that is usually a secondary amplification stage and often is not as clean in terms of amplifying the sound signal. We touch on that a bit in this episode: ruclips.net/video/H_fzuu0m7OE/видео.html I hope that helps.
What audio file formats will these devices record natively? Do any support 24-bit 192 kHz FLAC files? are any higher field recording options available?
Hey Curtis! If I am shooting a bunch of interviews and wanted to save time in post, is it bad to run audio from my external recorder into my camera? Does that defeat the purpose of using an external recorder?
Hi Josh, you get most of the benefits but not all of them. If you set it up correctly so that the audio recording is doing most of the gain work (amplification), then it can usually do a much better job than most cameras. So you get that benefit. However, you are then using the camera's analogue to digital converter rather than the converter in the audio recorder. Again, these are usually higher quality in recorders vs. cameras. All that said, this is a legitimate workflow. If you're not getting paid to do the extra work in post, and you don't need to do any mixing (particularly for two mic inputs), then this can be a fine workflow and result in pretty good quality. I work this way when I need to keep the rig ultra-light and I'm not getting paid to do the extra work in post.
Greetings Curtis, love your videos, thanks very much! I will be using a MixPre-3 to capture audio whilst shooting video from two DSLR cameras capturing different angles of the same scene. In order to provide the least editing hassle and the highest quality (while also taking into account the cost...), what's the best way to sync the audio from the MixPre with both videos? Can you comment on the usefulness of External Timecode generators (tentacle sync, for example) in this situation, I've never used one before? Again, I would love to minimize the editing work. Many many thanks! David
+David Youngblood here’s a piece I shot on timecode workflow: ruclips.net/video/KpJql4ojm50/видео.html There’s a fair bit of experimenting you need to do up front to work out whether your cameras have any latency between sound and picture on your camera to use that offset in post. My favorite way to sync timecode is to use Tentacle Sync Studio which you can buy separately or it comes with Tentacle Sync timecode generators.
Is it necessary to have a Tentacle Sync on each unit (one for each camera and one for the recorder) or can I put one on each camera, sync them, and then run the timecode from the HDMI of one camera into the MixPre? Best, David
Hi David, the short answer is that that will most likely not work. Cameras which send timecode via HDMI usually do NOT have a dedicated timecode input, but rather you record timecode to the video clips via the camera's microphone input. The camera just records timecode as sound and doesn't have any understanding that it is timecode, nor a means to convert the sound to timecode as metadata on the video clip. So in this case, yes, you would need an additional timecode generator for the audio recorder (unless the recorder has an in-built timecode generator and the least expensive recorder with a good quality TC generator of which I am aware is the Zoom F4). I hope that helps!
One last note: I work as a sound mixer on relatively small budget film and video jobs (usually with an overall budget of less than $20,000). I have never been asked to provide timecode as part of my services on these smaller budget projects. The prevailing thought seems to be that it is just as easy to slate and/or sync with pluraleyes. Timecode is mainly used in pieces where at the end of production, you have a large number of audio/video clips (e.g., greater than 100 and often several hundred).
I listened with my Sennheiser HD595 and I immediately saw that the MixPre has a better timbre. The 633 seems to have more depth than the MixPre. Thanks for the comparison!
Thank you, Curtis! Any news? I thought, you can share original files within Soundcloud, but if no, maybe you can use Google Drive or something... I'm looking for compact 4+ track recorder, and I know f8, but MixPre6 seems to be nice alternative. It will be nice to have some photos with recorders together just to understand sizes. Is there any possibility to use one gain knob for all 4 preamps together with MixPre? Thank you!
Hi, sorry, I've been busy working on the final review. I'll try to find a solution for hosting the raw audio files. In the final review, I show the MixPre-6 next to the SD 633 so hopefully that helps. You can link channels, yes.
Thanks much Curtis for the audio compare! This was exactly what I was waiting for (especially the noise floor compare). I had my volume up to 100% and really didn't hear much difference at all with the noise floor (but like you said you had other stuff running in your basement creating noise). I was hoping that the better self-noise of the MixPre-3/6 (at least on paper) would be worth replacing my Zoom F8, but after hearing your test it is not.
Curtis Judd I hear differences. One sounds crunched. The other sounds wide in ambient. One sounds 3D, the other sounds flat. One factor is our hearing. Once you get your hearing evaluated, it shows the biases of you analyze the report and your left and right ear have handicaps and biases. Once I learned this, it opened my eyes to why I equalize differently. All that being said, unless the audio work is so poor the consumer is listening back on smart phones or ear buds or TV or consumer speakers degrading anything we do and there is a large acceptance of audio non fidelity because it’s just the mind of the consumer now except in specific uses. Doesn’t mean we should stop producing the beat but realize better doesn’t mean we make more for our craft. We do it out of our own sense of love, care and responsibility. Don’t mean to turn his channel into a forum. My apologies, Curtis.
Yep, I hear a definite MUSICAL quaity difference getween both the SD's and the F8. I can't deny it to myself. The warmth of liveness vrs a colder grittiness from the F8 sound sample. My recordings are only of music, mainly classical...solo acoustic: piano, clarinet, violin guitar plus small group ensembles. I have been thrashing about getting an F4n model ( $449 ) or F8 ( older model being blown off occasionally for only $500 ) vrs a MixPre6 ( mucho bucks with not discount ). ARRRRGH, I really need acknowledge that I hear reality and music from SD recordings I've heard here and on Gearslutz....and I'll just have to save up for a MixPre 6.
So, after quite a handful of years I'll just add my two cents. I'm a sound guy doing mostly documentary and independent films sound. I have owned my Zoom F8 since 2017 and it is completely 100% functional. Not a single failure. I've taken it to rather harsh environments ranging from insane humid and excruciatingly hot Caribbean to -4 celsius and over 6000 mts above sea level. It's still rock solid. It's honestly been in good hands. After all these years I'm finally upgrading to a SD MP 10 II (and keeping my F8 as backup). I've always find it a bit more tricky to get that..."in your face" american-dialog-sound with the Zoom. Digital limiters have been a bit of a pain here and there but in all fairness it's been ok. For the money (I paid just about 1k, new at BH), the F8 is just such a good piece of hardware man. It paid itself within like my first 3 or 4 jobs as a freshly graduated sound guy. I think I watched this video back then and thought like..."it's ok! I wont pay more than double for that extra" to be fair, I could not afford to. But now, to my ears, it is pretty clear that the SD (and others like Sonosax) do sound BETTER and I'm at a point in my journey where I think I need to step a bit up. I guess the goal would be to grab a 833 in the far future! Let's see. Thanks Curtis.
That’s strange that the mix pre has the darkest sound, and the F8 has the brightest sound, and the 633 is in the middle. It makes me wonder if you didn’t slightly change your mic position or distance or something by accident
Hi Curtis, just found your channel and this video. Right up my alley. I have the F8 and it has been great to me thus far. Really awesome to see you demo multiple options. Thanks for the good info. Looking forward to checking out your sound videos! -matt
Hi Curtis, First of all thanks for your Great work! I learn a lot on every Tutorial. :-) So... I have a noise problem with Recording with my Wireless Mic sennheiser ew 122 eng g3 in combination with my zoom h6n and also my tascam dr70d. When I am recording in a quiet situation like an interview, I always get a white noise on it. It is pretty the same noise like in your sound examples, but a little bit louder. I spended hours and hours with different settings, but nothings changed the noise situation. I am not really shure whats the reason for it. As I heard the sound devices mixpre sound...wow! For me it is without any hiss and white noise. Maybe this hardware is the solution for my soundproblems? Or have wireless mics more noise? It would be great to get a little feedback from you. So... Sorry for my bad english and greetings from Germany ;-)
+Michael Schneider hi Michael, it is quite common to experience noise with wireless systems. The causes can range from radio frequency interference to electro magnetic interference. Sometimes I find that certain microphones act like antennas and pick up RF even when they did not at a different location. Also, I assume you have already put the G3 through a scan to find clean frequencies? The manual also has some good advice on how to set things up and troubleshoot, so I'd recommend a review of that. Best wishes!
Thanks Curtis :-) you are absolute right! I tried everything what the manual recommends. I checked many different free frequencies. also countless settings with the sensitivity of the sennheiser transmitter and receiver and the h6 / dr70. Sennheiser wrote that the eng g3 are absolut noiseless...thats a really optimistic specification from sennheiser ;-) so... my hope is that the sound devices mixpre-3 will reduced the noise of the recording device at least. btw with my boom mic ntg3 the sound is noiseless with both recorder. So may be wireless recording interviews is not the best way to get a clean sound. Curtis, thanks for your help. Take care :-)
Thank you for showing this comparison. To my ears the Zoom sounds a bit brittle in the high midrange, similar to what I felt when BH did a Zoom vs SD 688. At that time there was not a budget option SD to reach for. The SDs in this video sounds very similar, but I almost feel that the Mixpre is more natural sounding. How would you say other budget recorders would compare in terms of timbre? Something like the Tascam DR70D? Which I have better experience with than the Zoom H series.
+Dustbrigade I find that the lower priced Tascams and Zooms also tend to have a hard time with the higher frequencies. The overall sound of the MixPre is smoother.
I have two video cameras, and need to sync them as well as needing proper mics. I have a difficult time to get the proper system together. help. Regards, Solomon
I'm still not sure how to register the sound and videos together. Like I said, I'm the guy they wrote the "Audio for idiots" book for. I thought the clapper board would work for me.
Yes, will need to capture audio on both cameras. Here's an episode which walks through the process of dual-system sound that may help: ruclips.net/video/dkTYpP6eec0/видео.html
As an audio pro, I find your assessments to be "spot on". With reference to the SD 633 (and 688 for that matter) - in a class by themselves, but sonically remarkably close to the MixPre's (3 and 6).
It would have been great to hear the 3 device using the same source. You might be just be physically a little bit different, and maybe your voices changed as you moved your body... If doing an equal recording would give the same result, then the difference is huge for me... I didn't expect so much difference Between the Zoom F8 and the MixPre, and the MixPre and the 633. It was enough to not take any chance and go with the much more expensive 633. I'll probably end up doing my own testing video using the same source. (Though, maybe I better not do it and regret not going the MixPre-6T route with 2 tentacle for Timecode). I'm upgrading from a Tascam DR-70D, main reason I was looking for something else is because of booting issue I have with it... It keep freezing sometime or phantom power won't be ask to be activated requiring the battery to be removed and put back in. F8n was super interesting, but was told it wasn't great... After a few audio test, I agree to a certain point, so was looking at MicPre-10T... But that is already pretty expensive, so maybe the mixpre-6 with 2 tentacle... But while I'm there trying to cheap out, why not go with the 633 and not think anymore about it ;) I got a short film to film this weekend, and going to receive the 633 recorder this week... Will have my Tascam as a backup.
Actually, rooms have three issues: ambient-generated sound (fridge), reflections (echo) and modes (resonances). Arguably semantic, most small rooms indeed have 'echo' and not 'true reverb'. The difference is evident in some digital reverbs which offer 'early reflections' and 'tail'. True reverb is what happens when early and late reflections become dense enough as to be indistinct from one another - a case of quantity changing the quality but all reflections nevertheless. Applying sound blankets will 'absorb' some of the higher frequency reflections, perhaps from 1kHz and up, but not the ones approaching bass - about 250Hz depending on room size. At that point, you have something called the Schroeder Frequency at which sound begins to behave differently and becomes what's known as 'standing waves' or 'modes'. Luckily, we only need to treat down to about 63Hz according to the EBU and all of this can be done with either fluffy or rigid insulation. Most people don't need specialized absorbers known as 'resonant absorbers' and I have a video on my channel detailing why. Basically, blankets are a good start and perhaps sufficient in some cases but ideally some insulation and diffusion will give you the best result.
You think the Sound Devices sound warmer than the Zoom? That's not what I'm hearing. I thought the Zoom was ever so slightly warmer, so I'm wondering if we're perhaps both a little biased. I own the Zoom and probably want it to be the best, and you seem very fond of Sound Devices. I don't know, but maybe there really isn't much difference. It's difficult to improve on perfection.
As I am losing hearing, I do not notice the differences among recorders which is good because I can go for a cheapie without feeling I compromised quality. Yet, I cannot understand how I can hear a smartphone vibrating in the upper unit above my room. Pity. Compared with Tascam consumer products, Zoom products always has less bass than Tascam ones. So it's no surprise you said so; though, I didn't notice it, but that's only me. Thank you for nice video again, and congratulation on successful recording (in video mode). (Grin)
The Zoom’s more tinny sound could be more preferred for recording sound f/x and environmental sounds. The Sound Devices warmer sound could be more beneficial for voice and musical instrument sounds.
The dynamic range changes for each one. F8 is the shortest dynamic range of the bunch, mixpre-6 is an audible step up and the Sound Device 633 is just miles ahead in dynamic range. I am listening on reference speakers with 1000watt 3 way monitors and 6000watt LFE through a benchmark 3 DAC
I could but probably won't since I need to get work done with them. I nearly drove my dad crazy when I was a kid because I opened every electronic device in the house and ended up breaking some of them.
Really wanted to go for the Zoom. But the difference is clear, even on the MixPre but more so on the 633. I guess I could continue using my 442 as a front end even just for the boom. Although that's a lot of weight for one channel
Curtis Judd On vocal recording or everything? I thought you said in this (or perhaps another video that the preamps on the MixPre and 688 series are the same) ??? I have used the 788T before and I just find them harsh and brittle compared to Apogee and Nagra. I found Apogee to be the best all in one converter and preamp as Nagra was artificially sweet and smooth that I almost got annoyed with due to inaccuracy. But, I do classical music. The bang for the buck feature still seems like a winner for the 10 but with no digital audio outs (unless I missed something??) and no lock feature in the real world (which Tascam always includes and cannot understand how that is left off “Pro” devices and such a low cost addition)....I’m seeing the HS-P82 as a renaissance device. The boxy ugly duckling that is treated like a step child. All that being said, I have heard the sound is great without having heard it and I am usually not a fan of Tascam signature sound signature of a mic in a sock drawer, but I always get them modified or use outboard converters. Question, even SD website says “no back up recording” but am I correct that it is backing up real time with some latency to the USB? It better because a back up is a back up is a back up and I don’t want to hear some excuse about transferring after the fact.
On vocal recordings. I record mainly dialogue for film. I think some could potentially argue that the MixPre sounds more natural than the 633 and that the 633 adds more warmth than some would like. It doesn't bother me and I'm perfectly happy with the results I get with either one. At some level it is a personal preference. And one must also consider how much the audience cares about the difference. Some audiences are more discriminating and I imagine that audiences listening to classical music recordings may fall into that category.
Just saw your additional question in email (was truncated here on RUclips): Yes, I confirmed that it begins copying the current recording to the USB drive while recording and generally finishes writing to the USB drive within a few seconds of stopping the recording.
In my opinion, running against most comments here and the price tag, the MP sounds the best. It has the cleanest sound and the speech is more intelligible with less "artifacts" around words, while retaining a very good bass response. The noise performance is even better than the 633 but this could be caused by a different gain setting. One thing not covered in the test is the performance of the 3.5mm mic/line inputs on the MP.
Yeah dude I didn't hear muchdifference. Still ya used a mike I've never heard. But even at that they all sounded pretty much the same to me. I didn't note the bass thing believe it or not. So I guess the question still is only do you wana do surround sound. Cause if 1 does wana go surround the Mix Pres are out of the question. I don't know that last sound devices recorder. I forget how many mikes you can hook into it. How useable would you say the Mix Pres would be for someone that's blind? How often for instence do you have to use the touch screan? Do the menus rap? Are there menus with in menus and stuff like that? Man i really wish all these other companies would take a clue from Olympus.
Hey MrHamit64, good to hear from you. The microphone used here, the DPA 4017B is a pro-level shotgun microphone. It is well regarded in the professional location mixer community. The MixPre-6 has 4 XLR inputs so can do 4 channel recordings so that could be pretty impressive if you're into capturing ambisonic sound (or at least an estimation of ambisonic). You definitely need to be able to see the touchscreen to operate the device, unfortunately. There are plenty of menus and sub-menus and wrapping from one screen to the next. :(
Ah so it could be tricky then. Yeah cause I know well at least that for the 744-T the menus were pretty simple according to Neal. Infact it sounds like the 7 recorders don't have a menu persay it's just all the choises.
La diferencia en la respuesta de bajos y sub-bajos es exagerada entre la F6 y la SD mixpre, es demasiado extraña, he escuchado otras reseñas donde eso no sucede. En el audio de la F6 debe haber un HPF activado ya sea en el microfono o en el dispositivo.
mids boosted on mix pre good but 633 more balanced append after re-listen with Sine 10's liking the solid mids flat freq response of the Mix Pre over deeper low freq boosted sound of SD's 633
@@curtisjudd would you buy a Sound Devices 664 for $1550 right now. I found one for a steal. Or should I go with a mix pre 6 with 32 bit and buy a mkh416? I already have a ntg3 but I’m looking to expand my arsenal
@@ozprana Depends on what you need. I'd probably buy a MixPre-10 II if my budget were $1500. But if you need balanced outputs for working on larger productions where you need wireless feeds for crew, then the 664 or MixPre-10 II would make more sense than a MixPre-6.
If anyone is selling their Cantar Mini or X3 I am ready to purchase it. Aaton going out of business right at the moment that I was finalizing a purchase order is like a punch in the dick from God. Besides Aaton what is the absolute best sounding recorder? My ear loves Aaton and Nagra.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Recorder: speech / room tone
SD MixPre-6: 0:47 / 1:12
Zoom F8: 1:47 / 1:57
SD 633: 2:28 / 3:00
Thanks.
very useful :)
Curtis, you rock! These videos are extremely comprehensive and well done :) Thanks for taking the time to be so thorough.
Thanks Aaron!
Roomtone silence...
SD MixPre-3: 1:12
Zoom F8: 1:57
SD 633: 3:00
Thanks
Thanks for this video, Curtis! "Buying expensive recorders doesn't solve that problem (of room noise)". That is exactly my problem. I always have to turn off the fridge. Recently, I also obstruct the mechanical ventilation when I shoot videos. I also have a lot of reverbs and I didn't know about sound blankets. I need to look more into this. I don't know if you'll read this but if you do and have the time to reply: if I hang those blankets on some support (not on the wall, it's not possible), will it have the same effect and reduce reverb? Thanks a lot!
Hi Pierre, yes, I often hang the sound blankets on century stands. Not sure whether you've already seen this but here's another episode I did where we covered sound blankets: ruclips.net/video/uzyEaVYCk3s/видео.html Best wishes!
Thanks for the reply, Curtis! No, I haven't seen this other video yet. Thanks for the link! I'm going to watch it now as I need to rest (making subtitles is a tiring task :D). Best wishes too! :))
Great comparison! The 633 sounds really nice... darn lol. Would running a Sound Devices MM-1 into a Zoom F8 achieve the SD sound for that channel (say for a boom)?
In theory, though I haven’t used the MM-1.
633 clearly sounds much fuller deeper and richer, followed by the mix pre and then the zoom sounds flat and almost "hollowed out" compared to the others.
Thanks for the input! That's the order my ears heard them as well.
Thank you for the wonderfully accurate videos!
I'm a little surprised how much better the 633 still is compared to the MixPre. The Zoom is not in the same league at all to my ears. The MixPre might be EQ'ed to sound a bit more like the 633 regarding depth/richness/warmth/smoothness.
I concur
exactly my impression too....
What boom/stand (pictured at 0:37) are you using with the overhead mic? It's now a year later, what brand of boom/stand(s) would you recommend be considered? Thanks!
Hi Dan, that's a pricey conglomeration of several things:
K-Tek Avalon KEG150CCR Graphite boom pole with internal coiled cable: bhpho.to/2icrx4E
C-Stand: bhpho.to/2JsTAIz
Boom Holder/Adapter: bhpho.to/2ss4WCG
Great comparison. I'm currently using the Zoom H5 and I'm happy with it. Do you think it is worth upgrading to the Mix Pre-3 if I plan to buy Sennheiser MKH416 mic in the future?
If you've got the budget and you record often, I definitely think this is a worthwhile upgrade! But don't expect night and day difference unless you've got all the other elements of good recording in order (managing noise and reverb, mic placement, gain staging, etc.) Good luck!
Thank you, Curtis! You always reply with a detailed answer!
Hello again Chris, I just purchased the Panasonic S1H Camera. My goal is to create and film a Feature I can present to Netflix. I currently have the Rode NTG 1 and the H4N... If you would please tell me if what I have is good enough for 1 home location film... 3 actors speaking at a time no more. Or could you point me to the most inexpensive solution for both mic and field record to make this project sound great?
MixPre-3 and RODE NTG5 would be a good combination.
@@curtisjudd thank you so much... I really appreciate your help...
You mentioned before that you use a shogun recorder. How do you isolate the noise from that?
I keep it at least a couple of meters away from the microphone and that does pretty well.
I thought the difference in bass response was rather strange, so I compared the first two preamplifiers in the silence part. This is the part examined in forensics to see if recordings coming from different sources were edited together and masked in some way in a final step:) The signal level of the Zoom noise is about 3dB lower in power, but that can happen on power normalization. The strange thing is that the bass response is unnaturally weak on the zoom f8 noise floor. Many dB lower than normal below 120Hz. The Zoom noise floor's most powerful part is at over 100Hz, while it is much lower in frequency on the first preamp. The noise response bass roloff is almost parallel, but extends lower in frequency. The noise floor does not change in actual rooms and electronic noise sources. It sounds like a highpass and it looks like a highpass in spectrum analysis, so I would say that highpass filter was active on the signal path of the zoom during this recording and it was rather high in frequency.
Thanks for the test.
Curtis- Question relating to the SD Mix Pre-6 and 3 and the 633. I am finally pulling the string on purchasing new audio recorders(This weekend - for work starting 7-10-17). I would have already bought the Mix Pre-6, but everyone is out of stock. I looked with great detail in the last several of days at the Zoom F8 ( I like the features and the 8 inputs - do not like the headphone amp, limiters or HP filter - workflow is ok at best) , because I really need those extra inputs, and the SD 633. 1) I cannot get a straight answer from the SD distributors for what use is the 633's TA inputs and how I can convert them to XLR inputs. That could be a solution. 2) I can get a Mix Pre-3 now and then get the 6 in a few weeks when they are in stock. How much of a workflow issue would this be in your opinion using both recorders with a two camera system (GH5's) and syncing them all up? There will be times (50%), that I will only need 3 or 4 inputs. Thank You!!
Stu Schnurman (BTW - Bic Raven is the company)
+Bic Raven hi Stu, the three TA line inputs on the 633 are usually used to take a line level signal, often from wireless systems. You can also put a mini preamp in front to add mic inputs. Mozegear makes the mini papi and Sound Devices makes the MM1.
Syncing sound from two different recorders is certainly possible, but can be a little heavy. You would lose the ability to create a full mix unless you take up a channel or two feeding a mix from one to the other. I think you'd be in a better situation with the F8 if you need that many channels. You might consider renting an F8 or 633 to see how they each work hands-on. Good luck!
Your lighting is really good, dang! Also thanks for the comparison video! Honestly they were all impressively quiet, and sounded good in their own way. To me the F8 sounded a bit sterile, which isn't necessarily bad, the 633 sounded warm, and the MixPre seemed somewhere in between. I wonder if buying something like the Sound Devices MM-1 preamp and sending that to the line in of the zoom would give not only an analogue limiter, but the Sound Devices tone?
+Chris Fuchs thanks! My sense is that the timbre of recorded sound is due mostly to the mic and preamp and then a small contribution from the analogue to digital converter (which would be in the F8). So I'd bet that with the MM1 and F8, it'd sound pretty close to the MixPre or 633. I'll need to try that some time.
Curtis I've been binge watching your videos on the Mixpres and the F series and still can't make my decision so I'll ask your professional opinion. For commercial voice over work that will be conducted in a whisper room on a Sennheiser 416 which do you believe would be best? Or if you have another great suggestion under, or near, the $1000 range I'd consider that. Your videos are SO thorough and non biased that it's truly amazing btw, so thank you.
Hi Robbie, thanks. The Zoom F4 or SD MixPre-3 would be enough inputs since it is just the one microphone. I personally prefer the sound of the MixPre preamps so the MixPre-3 would probably be my choice. Presumably you will power the recorder via AC rather than battery. If so, that's a +1 for the Zoom which comes with an AC adapter. You'd have to buy that for the MixPre. The MixPre has better limiters so if you happen to have occasional transient peaks that are a bit too high in amplitude, the MixPre does a better job handling those.
Either one will do a great job. If it helps, I would personally choose the MixPre. Good luck!
Curtis Judd then I will be grabbing the mixpre as I trust your opinion. Thank you very much for the reply.
Hey Curtis, which device would you recommend for recording a symphony orchestra? In other words, which device has the most musical, sweetest sound? Thank you.
Of the three we looked at here, the Sound Devices 6xx series (which has now been replaced with the 8xx series) or the MixPre.
Great Video, thanks that you explained the noise level topic so that ppl don't mix these things up and think they can fix acoustics with expensive gear :)
The pre amp of the Sound Device 633 sounded really warm and almost boomy, it doesn't distract and I'm sure in most situations it makes the flat signal very pleasing, but in a comparison like this such warm and low end boosting pre amps always let the more neutral and analytic pre amps look kinda bad. Seen it often when comparing japanese/german pre amps to english/american pre amps :P
Constantin hello. Do you find the preamps of zoom more natural sounding than the mixpre's ones. I hear more definition on mixpre preamps and more high and mid frequencies but I kind of feel that zoom might sound a bit more natural.
It's kinda a japanese thing that sound is more on the analytic side, you get the same with Yamaha Digital Mixers. It gives you a more "real" illustration of the audio, but for production it means it should give you more options, cause there is no coloring in the raw, but in the end you will have to do some warming in post or it could be to harsh for the ear. It's a diffrent approach and you will have to adopt to both sides in the end. It's just good to know what to expect from a product and like with microphones at a certain price point it's not about the technical quality, it's about features and what you prefer in a product for you personal workflow. Think about Shure SM58, it's still in use after all these years and the reason is not the audio quality, it's just that everyone knows how to work that mic so it gives you the result you want.
I agree. Depends on how you like to work. I love German engineered products. But I drive Japanese cars for their reliability. ;-)
I agree, in part, though I'd say, in practice the adaptation becomes a question of the shortest distance to the desired end result. I also agree with the Shure mic usage question, though I would opt for the SM57 in a studio setting.
Hey Curtis. I hear a big difference between the zoom f8 and the mixpre 6. The mixpre sounds much warmer. Is this difference also there between the f8n and the mixpre 6 mark 2? Thanks!
Yes, the MixPre II series has the same preamps as the originals.
between the series sound devices mixpre and sounddevice 633 which has a very good preamp!? for a choice of professional sound engineer
The 633 is the previous generation. The new generation is the 833, 888, and Scorpio which are the professional line of recorders. Their preamplifiers are slightly warmer than the MixPre.
Can I suggest an open call for new outro music? I keep visualizing lettuce slicers demonstrations to that twangy guitar ....
Already done. New intro music in videos since first part of May.
Curtis Judd if you search for cuckoomusic on this, he's my other guru for audio tips on RUclips. He covers Namm events etc, for the latest synth gear releases and so forth, pretty cool. Thanks for the response btw, and keep going, your reviews are very helpful
Curtis, how much did the F8n pro improved? With Sony MDR 7509HD headphones, I can clearly hear a difference; Mixpre6 is in a different class than F8 - way cleaner, nicer - and 633 even more so (to the point where it makes me check out the prices but not sure if it's worth it for now).
The F8n Pro sounds the same as the F8 and F8n to my ears.
@@curtisjudd thanks. I'm going with mixpre 6 ii; sounds a bit better to me.
@@cubul32 that’s my feel, too. Happy recording!
Thanks a lot for your great review Curtis. I was wondering if it is possible to upload the recordings somewhere where we could download the uncompress audio files. I also wanted to ask for you, that you know the sound of your voice better than us, which preamps sound more clinical, more accurate, more natural to you? Do you think there is more colourisation in some of these preamps? Finally, it would be really insightful if it is possible to make some more recording of different sound sources so we could get a better idea of the preamps timbre and definition.
Thanks Dimitris, I thought that they could be downloaded from Soundcloud but alas, no... I'll have to look for other options. I think the F8 probably sounds more clinical in terms of bass response but the Sound Devices may be more accurate in the higher frequencies. That's just my subjective opinion. I'll see about including some additional recordings in future episodes. Thanks.
Download the raw wav files here: drive.google.com/open?id=0B9fyi9ZjkoX3a3A0cjlHLXBRa0k
Curtis please help me out - WHICH MixPre should I get?? The MixPre6M...or the $100 more other one? Currently I use a Tascam Dr100 MkIII 2 ch recorder( love the built-in rechareable lithium battery) - but i need4-channels here and there PLUS i want better sound. I perform audio-only recordings of music, mainly classical of solo acoustic piano, clarinet, violin, guitar... plus small group ensembles and occasionally of large orchestras. I do not use it as an interface, don't "mix" in the unit ( I transfer the data from the SD card into my laptop and do some mastering with LogicProX.) I MAY add video recording to my offering so usable "timecode" would be nice. Would the 6Mgie me what I need or would I need the $100 more version?
I hear a definite MUSICAL quaity difference between both SD's and the F8. I can't deny it to myself....the warmth of "organic aliveness" vrs a colder grittiness from the F8 sound sample and from from SD & F8 recordings I've heard on Gearslutz. I have been thrashing about getting an F4n model ( $449 ) or F8 ( older model being blown off occasionally for only $500 ) vrs a MixPre6 ( mucho bucks with no discount ). ARRRRGH, I really need acknowledge that I'll just have to save up for a MixPre 6...but WHICH VERSION ?? Muchas gracias!!
You need the MixPre-6 not the 6M. The 6M is for overdubbing music production. Happy recording!
Excellent as alway! Curtis I’m upgrading from Tascam 70d, but still can’t decide between F6 and MixPre 3, which one you think I’m going to hear the best audio difference. I love the float 32 of f6. I’m a run and gun mode content creator.
If you use the same microphone and position the mic the same way, there shouldn’t be a huge difference in sound unless you gained incorrectly on the Tascam. If is 32-bit float you’re after, both the F6 and MixPre-3 II do that. The F6 is cheaper but the MixPre is more repairable if the unit gets damaged or stops working.
@@curtisjudd as always a very direct response. The answer I needed. Always a fan. Thanks again brother.
Hey Curtis, does the mixpre-6’s mixing capabilities match that of a recorder accompanied by a dedicated pre-amp mixer like the SD 302, or does the Mixpre-6 serve mainly as a recorder and still needs a dedicated mixer like the SD 302?
Hey! No need for an additional mixer in front of the MixPre, it's got mixing capabilities (basic vs advanced vs custom mode so you can set it up to work they way you prefer to work). There may be ergonomic advantages to other mixers/recorders, but the MixPre CAN do it all on its own.
Curtis Judd Thanks a bunch! You solved all my issues in one sweep!
What would you recommend for a starter mic? XLR is fine, as i have an adapter into 3.5mm.... Im looking for a shotgun style or cardioid.. something that i can use for boom indoors, and a general mic for filming...
I'd probably go for the RODE VideoMic Pro and boom it like this: ruclips.net/video/TUEmQBZKoBs/видео.html
thanks, but the videomic pro is above my budget... i was wondering if you knew of any cheap Chinese knock offs? that sound good? the videomicro is in my budget... anything xlr would work too...
Adapting xlr to 3.5mm is tricky because most XLR mics require phantom power and that's not possible via 3.5mm. There is this cheap shotgun microphone that I reviewed which also works pretty well: ruclips.net/video/Ecs0GWaPtto/видео.html
Curtis, what about a test on the F8 limiters vs SD analog limiters please. Im considering selling my F8 and buy the Mixpre 6 but i want to make sure it's worth the switch. Thank you for this informative video!
If limiters are important to your work, definitely go with the MixPre. The F8 and F4 limiters are post digital conversion so nearly useless for preventing clipping when sound over-modulates. HOWEVER, if you haven't run into issues yet, I'm also not sure the switch is justified on that feature alone. You give some things up moving from the F8 to the MixPre while you gain a different set of features on the MixPre. Still planning to do a "which works best for which situations" video at some point.
That video on "Which works best for which situations" is a great idea! In the meantime, I was looking at some stores out there for the MixPre-6 and it looks like it still hasn't been released?? Anyway, I guess I would just need to pre order. Thanks again, Curtis! Love your channel.
Hi Sy, it has definitely been released but the first batch of stock has sold out. Some of the retailers still show it as preorder but I don't think that's entirely accurate. I have one that I purchased from DVeStore.com so they have definitely begun shipping. Not sure why they still say "Preorder."
Curtis Judd Good to know. Thank you
Why are people so caught up worrying about limiters? How many times does your audio hit a limiter?
Hi Curtis, your videos are great. Can you compare Mixpre-6 with Mixpre-D? Even though Mixpre-D has only two inputs and lack of inner recording capability is still more expensive than the other. I asked a Sound Devices technician if the Mixpre-D has "better sound quality" than the other (ignoring inputs etc.) He said: The sound quality of Mixpre-D's components are better than the Mixpre-6. What do you think? Are you agree with that or how big the differences are "in terms of sound quality" for a serious production like broadcast or filmmaking? Thanks.
Hi, I haven't used the MixPre-D so I'm not certain on sound quality differences between the two. Based on my experience with Sound Devices other gear (I mix mainly with a 633), my guess is that it has a slightly warmer low end response. Is it a night and day difference? Not necessarily. As you can hear in this episode, the difference between the MixPre-6 and 633 is detectible on quality speakers or headphones, but not hugely different. I would be more concerned about whether the devices fit the needs of the production. Do they have enough inputs, enough outputs, the right kind of outputs, will we need to send wireless hop to camera, will we need to send wireless feed of the mix to director, script supervisor, etc. In those cases, the MixPre-D may or may not be a better choice.
In short: There probably is a very small difference in audio quality for dialogue recording. More important is whether the rest of the features match the needs of the production.
Curtis any video on the professional lapel mics
Planning on a video with lots of pro-level lavalier microphones. In the meantime, here are a few:
Shure Twinplex: ruclips.net/video/U6Axg0iP6wg/видео.html
Voice Technologies VT500: ruclips.net/video/9c74PsslcOk/видео.html
Countryman B6: ruclips.net/video/Lh1qVoBieVI/видео.html
How would you compare the Mix pre 6 vs the zoom F8 as far as functions? (Better use for film/field recorder )
I'm planning to put together another video on that. The high level answer is it depends on what is most important to you in the work that you do. I prefer the SD but for others, the F8 is a better option. More to come.
Hi Curtis, looking forward to the Mixpre vs F8 video. I asked you on a different post about using the Mixpre-6 vs F8 just after NAB specifically for field recording (ambient sounds, very soft to extremely loud, instrumental and vocal performances and VO). I was leaning towards the Mixpre-6 for the limiters/pres and worried the F8 would clip during experimenting with louder sound sources in the field. You said in that case to go with the Mixpre-6. Do you still feel that way after having more time with the it? Partly asking because I have a pre-order waiting and want to pull the trigger but still slightly hesitant!
Either of them could produce very nice field recordings. They both seem to have very nice preamps and plenty of dynamic range. If limiters are important to your work (e.g., you only get one shot at recording a particular field sound), then I would go MixPre. I also prefer the knobs/potentiometers on the MixPre.
If you'll ever need more inputs or balanced XLR outputs or in-built timecode generator or prefer a more robust external power input, the F8 is a great recorder. I find it's front panel a little crowded and it's knobs definitely on the small side.
So you can see there are plusses and minuses for both of them.
If I could only choose one, I'd probably go for the MixPre, but that's subjective and based on the type of work I do. I'm sorry I've not been more definitive but this is a case where if there's any way you can try one or both of them before you buy, that'd be ideal. Then you could get a better feel for each before you commit.You can rent a Zoom F8 here, for example: www.lensrentals.com/rent/other-video/camera-support/other-audio
And after we post the MixPre review early next week, we'll look at doing a future episode to compare the MixPre-6 and F8.
Good luck!
Curtis
Can you do a video to demo how I could use a g3 lav kit to send audio to my boom op while recording on location
Hi Randall, we had a discussion about that here: ruclips.net/video/_c64B9s0eCA/видео.html
In the discussion, we talked about sending the audio to camera, but you can do the same thing to send audio to your boom op.
Hello Curtis,
I am a beginner of professional sound recording which is full of passion
Could answer me about the deference between trim and fader ?
I have tested my equipment which is a zoom F8 and the sennheiser MKH 416-P48u3 shotgun mic
but I can't define what are there deference
For example, is it the same when I set the Trim at 35db which fader is 0db and the trim at 30 which fader is +5db?
Hello David, Trim is used to raise or amplify the level of the sound signal and a fader is used to attenuate or reduce the level of the sound signal. You usually do not want to amplify with your fader as that is usually a secondary amplification stage and often is not as clean in terms of amplifying the sound signal. We touch on that a bit in this episode: ruclips.net/video/H_fzuu0m7OE/видео.html I hope that helps.
What audio file formats will these devices record natively? Do any support 24-bit 192 kHz FLAC files? are any higher field recording options available?
They support up to 24 bit, 192kHz Wav PCM format (BWF compatible Wav). They do not support FLAC.
Hey Curtis! If I am shooting a bunch of interviews and wanted to save time in post, is it bad to run audio from my external recorder into my camera? Does that defeat the purpose of using an external recorder?
I am asking in terms of audio quality.
Hi Josh, you get most of the benefits but not all of them. If you set it up correctly so that the audio recording is doing most of the gain work (amplification), then it can usually do a much better job than most cameras. So you get that benefit. However, you are then using the camera's analogue to digital converter rather than the converter in the audio recorder. Again, these are usually higher quality in recorders vs. cameras.
All that said, this is a legitimate workflow. If you're not getting paid to do the extra work in post, and you don't need to do any mixing (particularly for two mic inputs), then this can be a fine workflow and result in pretty good quality.
I work this way when I need to keep the rig ultra-light and I'm not getting paid to do the extra work in post.
Greetings Curtis, love your videos, thanks very much!
I will be using a MixPre-3 to capture audio whilst shooting video from two DSLR cameras capturing different angles of the same scene. In order to provide the least editing hassle and the highest quality (while also taking into account the cost...), what's the best way to sync the audio from the MixPre with both videos? Can you comment on the usefulness of External Timecode generators (tentacle sync, for example) in this situation, I've never used one before? Again, I would love to minimize the editing work. Many many thanks!
David
+David Youngblood here’s a piece I shot on timecode workflow: ruclips.net/video/KpJql4ojm50/видео.html
There’s a fair bit of experimenting you need to do up front to work out whether your cameras have any latency between sound and picture on your camera to use that offset in post. My favorite way to sync timecode is to use Tentacle Sync Studio which you can buy separately or it comes with Tentacle Sync timecode generators.
Thank you ,Curtis, that answers my question. I'll look at your timecode piece now.
Is it necessary to have a Tentacle Sync on each unit (one for each camera and one for the recorder) or can I put one on each camera, sync them, and then run the timecode from the HDMI of one camera into the MixPre?
Best, David
Hi David, the short answer is that that will most likely not work. Cameras which send timecode via HDMI usually do NOT have a dedicated timecode input, but rather you record timecode to the video clips via the camera's microphone input. The camera just records timecode as sound and doesn't have any understanding that it is timecode, nor a means to convert the sound to timecode as metadata on the video clip. So in this case, yes, you would need an additional timecode generator for the audio recorder (unless the recorder has an in-built timecode generator and the least expensive recorder with a good quality TC generator of which I am aware is the Zoom F4). I hope that helps!
One last note: I work as a sound mixer on relatively small budget film and video jobs (usually with an overall budget of less than $20,000). I have never been asked to provide timecode as part of my services on these smaller budget projects. The prevailing thought seems to be that it is just as easy to slate and/or sync with pluraleyes. Timecode is mainly used in pieces where at the end of production, you have a large number of audio/video clips (e.g., greater than 100 and often several hundred).
I listened with my Sennheiser HD595 and I immediately saw that the MixPre has a better timbre. The 633 seems to have more depth than the MixPre. Thanks for the comparison!
Thanks for your Insights 👍
Hi!
Thanks for the test!
Can you please share the original WAV files for download (from the Soundcloud for example)
I thought that Soundcloud would allow that but alas, no. I'll look for other options.
Thank you, Curtis!
Any news? I thought, you can share original files within Soundcloud, but if no, maybe you can use Google Drive or something...
I'm looking for compact 4+ track recorder, and I know f8, but MixPre6 seems to be nice alternative.
It will be nice to have some photos with recorders together just to understand sizes.
Is there any possibility to use one gain knob for all 4 preamps together with MixPre?
Thank you!
Hi, sorry, I've been busy working on the final review. I'll try to find a solution for hosting the raw audio files. In the final review, I show the MixPre-6 next to the SD 633 so hopefully that helps. You can link channels, yes.
Raw Wav files available here: drive.google.com/open?id=0B9fyi9ZjkoX3a3A0cjlHLXBRa0k
Thanks much Curtis for the audio compare! This was exactly what I was waiting for (especially the noise floor compare). I had my volume up to 100% and really didn't hear much difference at all with the noise floor (but like you said you had other stuff running in your basement creating noise). I was hoping that the better self-noise of the MixPre-3/6 (at least on paper) would be worth replacing my Zoom F8, but after hearing your test it is not.
I agree, I wouldn't use that as the only reason to switch.
Curtis Judd I hear differences. One sounds crunched. The other sounds wide in ambient. One sounds 3D, the other sounds flat. One factor is our hearing. Once you get your hearing evaluated, it shows the biases of you analyze the report and your left and right ear have handicaps and biases. Once I learned this, it opened my eyes to why I equalize differently. All that being said, unless the audio work is so poor the consumer is listening back on smart phones or ear buds or TV or consumer speakers degrading anything we do and there is a large acceptance of audio non fidelity because it’s just the mind of the consumer now except in specific uses. Doesn’t mean we should stop producing the beat but realize better doesn’t mean we make more for our craft. We do it out of our own sense of love, care and responsibility. Don’t mean to turn his channel into a forum. My apologies, Curtis.
Yep, I hear a definite MUSICAL quaity difference getween both the SD's and the F8. I can't deny it to myself. The warmth of liveness vrs a colder grittiness from the F8 sound sample. My recordings are only of music, mainly classical...solo acoustic: piano, clarinet, violin guitar plus small group ensembles. I have been thrashing about getting an F4n model ( $449 ) or F8 ( older model being blown off occasionally for only $500 ) vrs a MixPre6 ( mucho bucks with not discount ). ARRRRGH, I really need acknowledge that I hear reality and music from SD recordings I've heard here and on Gearslutz....and I'll just have to save up for a MixPre 6.
So, after quite a handful of years I'll just add my two cents. I'm a sound guy doing mostly documentary and independent films sound. I have owned my Zoom F8 since 2017 and it is completely 100% functional. Not a single failure. I've taken it to rather harsh environments ranging from insane humid and excruciatingly hot Caribbean to -4 celsius and over 6000 mts above sea level. It's still rock solid. It's honestly been in good hands. After all these years I'm finally upgrading to a SD MP 10 II (and keeping my F8 as backup). I've always find it a bit more tricky to get that..."in your face" american-dialog-sound with the Zoom. Digital limiters have been a bit of a pain here and there but in all fairness it's been ok.
For the money (I paid just about 1k, new at BH), the F8 is just such a good piece of hardware man. It paid itself within like my first 3 or 4 jobs as a freshly graduated sound guy.
I think I watched this video back then and thought like..."it's ok! I wont pay more than double for that extra" to be fair, I could not afford to. But now, to my ears, it is pretty clear that the SD (and others like Sonosax) do sound BETTER and I'm at a point in my journey where I think I need to step a bit up.
I guess the goal would be to grab a 833 in the far future! Let's see.
Thanks Curtis.
👍 yes, the F8 and successors have been really good to me as well.
That’s strange that the mix pre has the darkest sound, and the F8 has the brightest sound, and the 633 is in the middle. It makes me wonder if you didn’t slightly change your mic position or distance or something by accident
No, kept it the same
Hi Curtis, just found your channel and this video. Right up my alley. I have the F8 and it has been great to me thus far. Really awesome to see you demo multiple options.
Thanks for the good info. Looking forward to checking out your sound videos!
-matt
+FlickFanatics thanks Matt!
Hi Curtis, First of all thanks for your Great work! I learn a lot on every Tutorial. :-) So... I have a noise problem with Recording with my Wireless Mic sennheiser ew 122 eng g3 in combination with my zoom h6n and also my tascam dr70d. When I am recording in a quiet situation like an interview, I always get a white noise on it. It is pretty the same noise like in your sound examples, but a little bit louder. I spended hours and hours with different settings, but nothings changed the noise situation. I am not really shure whats the reason for it. As I heard the sound devices mixpre sound...wow! For me it is without any hiss and white noise. Maybe this hardware is the solution for my soundproblems? Or have wireless mics more noise? It would be great to get a little feedback from you.
So... Sorry for my bad english and greetings from Germany ;-)
+Michael Schneider hi Michael, it is quite common to experience noise with wireless systems. The causes can range from radio frequency interference to electro magnetic interference. Sometimes I find that certain microphones act like antennas and pick up RF even when they did not at a different location. Also, I assume you have already put the G3 through a scan to find clean frequencies? The manual also has some good advice on how to set things up and troubleshoot, so I'd recommend a review of that. Best wishes!
Thanks Curtis :-) you are absolute right! I tried everything what the manual recommends. I checked many different free frequencies. also countless settings with the sensitivity of the sennheiser transmitter and receiver and the h6 / dr70. Sennheiser wrote that the eng g3 are absolut noiseless...thats a really optimistic specification from sennheiser ;-) so... my hope is that the sound devices mixpre-3 will reduced the noise of the recording device at least. btw with my boom mic ntg3 the sound is noiseless with both recorder. So may be wireless recording interviews is not the best way to get a clean sound.
Curtis, thanks for your help. Take care :-)
Thank you for showing this comparison. To my ears the Zoom sounds a bit brittle in the high midrange, similar to what I felt when BH did a Zoom vs SD 688. At that time there was not a budget option SD to reach for. The SDs in this video sounds very similar, but I almost feel that the Mixpre is more natural sounding.
How would you say other budget recorders would compare in terms of timbre? Something like the Tascam DR70D? Which I have better experience with than the Zoom H series.
+Dustbrigade I find that the lower priced Tascams and Zooms also tend to have a hard time with the higher frequencies. The overall sound of the MixPre is smoother.
Thank you!
this time i like the color u graded !!
wondering how it will be sound like in comparison to 744T!
Thanks. Quite similar, I'm sure!
Thank you! You have the most helpful and informative reviews. It helps a lot to navigate in the choice of audio equipment.
Thanks!
I have two video cameras, and need to sync them as well as needing proper mics. I have a difficult time to get the proper system together.
help. Regards, Solomon
Sounds like you need a slate/clapper board! What do you have so far?
I have aa clapper board, but it isn't slate. Its plastic. I tried using it, but it didn't register on my panasonic.
I'm still not sure how to register the sound and videos together. Like I said, I'm the guy they wrote the "Audio for idiots" book for. I thought the clapper board would work for me.
I may need to get a better pistol mic. for the panasonic. Right now its the internal mic only on that camera.
Yes, will need to capture audio on both cameras. Here's an episode which walks through the process of dual-system sound that may help: ruclips.net/video/dkTYpP6eec0/видео.html
As an audio pro, I find your assessments to be "spot on". With reference to the SD 633 (and 688 for that matter) - in a class by themselves, but sonically remarkably close to the MixPre's (3 and 6).
Thanks Don, much appreciated!
I love the details of your studio :) having a basement in dry Utah, is a nice thing...
Yes, works pretty well. :)
It would have been great to hear the 3 device using the same source. You might be just be physically a little bit different, and maybe your voices changed as you moved your body... If doing an equal recording would give the same result, then the difference is huge for me... I didn't expect so much difference Between the Zoom F8 and the MixPre, and the MixPre and the 633. It was enough to not take any chance and go with the much more expensive 633. I'll probably end up doing my own testing video using the same source. (Though, maybe I better not do it and regret not going the MixPre-6T route with 2 tentacle for Timecode). I'm upgrading from a Tascam DR-70D, main reason I was looking for something else is because of booting issue I have with it... It keep freezing sometime or phantom power won't be ask to be activated requiring the battery to be removed and put back in. F8n was super interesting, but was told it wasn't great... After a few audio test, I agree to a certain point, so was looking at MicPre-10T... But that is already pretty expensive, so maybe the mixpre-6 with 2 tentacle... But while I'm there trying to cheap out, why not go with the 633 and not think anymore about it ;) I got a short film to film this weekend, and going to receive the 633 recorder this week... Will have my Tascam as a backup.
Thanks Marc. Good luck.
Actually, rooms have three issues: ambient-generated sound (fridge), reflections (echo) and modes (resonances). Arguably semantic, most small rooms indeed have 'echo' and not 'true reverb'. The difference is evident in some digital reverbs which offer 'early reflections' and 'tail'. True reverb is what happens when early and late reflections become dense enough as to be indistinct from one another - a case of quantity changing the quality but all reflections nevertheless. Applying sound blankets will 'absorb' some of the higher frequency reflections, perhaps from 1kHz and up, but not the ones approaching bass - about 250Hz depending on room size. At that point, you have something called the Schroeder Frequency at which sound begins to behave differently and becomes what's known as 'standing waves' or 'modes'. Luckily, we only need to treat down to about 63Hz according to the EBU and all of this can be done with either fluffy or rigid insulation. Most people don't need specialized absorbers known as 'resonant absorbers' and I have a video on my channel detailing why. Basically, blankets are a good start and perhaps sufficient in some cases but ideally some insulation and diffusion will give you the best result.
Thanks Hexspa! Appreciate the detailed info.
Judd is zoom h4n pro as good as these
No, not in my opinion.
Can't wait for the MixPre-10T review. Thank you!
Same for me, looking forward to it!
You think the Sound Devices sound warmer than the Zoom? That's not what I'm hearing. I thought the Zoom was ever so slightly warmer, so I'm wondering if we're perhaps both a little biased. I own the Zoom and probably want it to be the best, and you seem very fond of Sound Devices. I don't know, but maybe there really isn't much difference. It's difficult to improve on perfection.
Hi Lau, they are both very good. Stick with what you like. I support that. :)
I'd just like to thank you for your videos . Very informative.Thanks for your integrity.
Hi Keith, thanks for the feedback, I very much appreciate it.
As I am losing hearing, I do not notice the differences among recorders which is good because I can go for a cheapie without feeling I compromised quality. Yet, I cannot understand how I can hear a smartphone vibrating in the upper unit above my room. Pity.
Compared with Tascam consumer products, Zoom products always has less bass than Tascam ones. So it's no surprise you said so; though, I didn't notice it, but that's only me.
Thank you for nice video again, and congratulation on successful recording (in video mode). (Grin)
Thanks :)
Thank you Curtis always great, informative videos. Firmware 1.11, ASIO Drivers, and Wingman for Android, all available now. Thanks SoundDevices!
Yes, they're doing a great job getting this refined quickly.
"silence" at 1:12 (sd) and 1:56 (zoom)
...and the 633 at 3:00
Thanks.
Juksemakeren i
The Zoom’s more tinny sound could be more preferred for recording sound f/x and environmental sounds. The Sound Devices warmer sound could be more beneficial for voice and musical instrument sounds.
👍
Great qulaity video as always! Thanks Curtis. (Also thanks for the "reduce your volume" heads-up :))))) )
Thanks!
The dynamic range changes for each one. F8 is the shortest dynamic range of the bunch, mixpre-6 is an audible step up and the Sound Device 633 is just miles ahead in dynamic range.
I am listening on reference speakers with 1000watt 3 way monitors and 6000watt LFE through a benchmark 3 DAC
👍
can you open those recorders up with a screw driver and show us what a preamp looks like?
I could but probably won't since I need to get work done with them. I nearly drove my dad crazy when I was a kid because I opened every electronic device in the house and ended up breaking some of them.
Haha!
Really wanted to go for the Zoom. But the difference is clear, even on the MixPre but more so on the 633. I guess I could continue using my 442 as a front end even just for the boom. Although that's a lot of weight for one channel
I hear that. Good exercise. 😉
Is it me or does the Mix Pre sound brittle compared to 633?
It sounds a little thinner to me - a little less low-end warmth. But the highs seemed similar to me.
Curtis Judd On vocal recording or everything? I thought you said in this (or perhaps another video that the preamps on the MixPre and 688 series are the same) ??? I have used the 788T before and I just find them harsh and brittle compared to Apogee and Nagra. I found Apogee to be the best all in one converter and preamp as Nagra was artificially sweet and smooth that I almost got annoyed with due to inaccuracy. But, I do classical music. The bang for the buck feature still seems like a winner for the 10 but with no digital audio outs (unless I missed something??) and no lock feature in the real world (which Tascam always includes and cannot understand how that is left off “Pro” devices and such a low cost addition)....I’m seeing the HS-P82 as a renaissance device. The boxy ugly duckling that is treated like a step child. All that being said, I have heard the sound is great without having heard it and I am usually not a fan of Tascam signature sound signature of a mic in a sock drawer, but I always get them modified or use outboard converters.
Question, even SD website says “no back up recording” but am I correct that it is backing up real time with some latency to the USB? It better because a back up is a back up is a back up and I don’t want to hear some excuse about transferring after the fact.
On vocal recordings. I record mainly dialogue for film. I think some could potentially argue that the MixPre sounds more natural than the 633 and that the 633 adds more warmth than some would like. It doesn't bother me and I'm perfectly happy with the results I get with either one. At some level it is a personal preference. And one must also consider how much the audience cares about the difference. Some audiences are more discriminating and I imagine that audiences listening to classical music recordings may fall into that category.
Just saw your additional question in email (was truncated here on RUclips): Yes, I confirmed that it begins copying the current recording to the USB drive while recording and generally finishes writing to the USB drive within a few seconds of stopping the recording.
Good points regarding noise control 👍🏻
Thank you very much for the comparison really appreaciate it
Thanks and you're welcome!
Thank you for this professional comparison.
You're welcome, thanks Luis.
Very informative.... As always !
👍
In my opinion, running against most comments here and the price tag, the MP sounds the best. It has the cleanest sound and the speech is more intelligible with less "artifacts" around words, while retaining a very good bass response. The noise performance is even better than the 633 but this could be caused by a different gain setting.
One thing not covered in the test is the performance of the 3.5mm mic/line inputs on the MP.
Thanks for sharing
Very good coparison..
Thank you very much Curtis.
You're welcome!
Yeah dude I didn't hear muchdifference. Still ya used a mike I've never heard. But even at that they all sounded pretty much the same to me. I didn't note the bass thing believe it or not. So I guess the question still is only do you wana do surround sound. Cause if 1 does wana go surround the Mix Pres are out of the question. I don't know that last sound devices recorder. I forget how many mikes you can hook into it. How useable would you say the Mix Pres would be for someone that's blind? How often for instence do you have to use the touch screan? Do the menus rap? Are there menus with in menus and stuff like that? Man i really wish all these other companies would take a clue from Olympus.
Hey MrHamit64, good to hear from you. The microphone used here, the DPA 4017B is a pro-level shotgun microphone. It is well regarded in the professional location mixer community.
The MixPre-6 has 4 XLR inputs so can do 4 channel recordings so that could be pretty impressive if you're into capturing ambisonic sound (or at least an estimation of ambisonic).
You definitely need to be able to see the touchscreen to operate the device, unfortunately. There are plenty of menus and sub-menus and wrapping from one screen to the next. :(
Ah so it could be tricky then. Yeah cause I know well at least that for the 744-T the menus were pretty simple according to Neal. Infact it sounds like the 7 recorders don't have a menu persay it's just all the choises.
La diferencia en la respuesta de bajos y sub-bajos es exagerada entre la F6 y la SD mixpre, es demasiado extraña, he escuchado otras reseñas donde eso no sucede. En el audio de la F6 debe haber un HPF activado ya sea en el microfono o en el dispositivo.
No, I double checked.
beautiful quality
Thanks!
Thanks for that ! I think they sound really close. Cheers
Yes, takes some good speakers and careful listening to tell them apart.
Listen to the difference between the sound of Curtis' breaths & lip smacks in the examples. Zoom audio sounds like an mp3 in comparison.
Thanks Alec.
mids boosted on mix pre good but 633 more balanced append after re-listen with Sine 10's liking the solid mids flat freq response of the Mix Pre over deeper low freq boosted sound of SD's 633
That's what I hear as well.
Dear Curtis, thanks again for this comparison! Keep up the Great Work!! All My Best ;-)
Thank you!
zoom always sounds digital and harsh- SD sounds much more natural
Thanks for the feedback.
Good test cris
Thanks!
I think the mix pre sounded the best followed by the 633. F8 I can live without
i retract my statement, the 633 sounds the best. now that im listening on my hs8's
Fair enough. 🎙
@@curtisjudd would you buy a Sound Devices 664 for $1550 right now. I found one for a steal. Or should I go with a mix pre 6 with 32 bit and buy a mkh416? I already have a ntg3 but I’m looking to expand my arsenal
@@ozprana Depends on what you need. I'd probably buy a MixPre-10 II if my budget were $1500. But if you need balanced outputs for working on larger productions where you need wireless feeds for crew, then the 664 or MixPre-10 II would make more sense than a MixPre-6.
@@curtisjudd understood. Thanks 🎤
which one is most true,,, accuracy,,, mirror the truth
Hmm. I haven’t done that type of scientific test.
If anyone is selling their Cantar Mini or X3 I am ready to purchase it. Aaton going out of business right at the moment that I was finalizing a purchase order is like a punch in the dick from God. Besides Aaton what is the absolute best sounding recorder? My ear loves Aaton and Nagra.
If I had an X3, I'd hold on to it tightly.
Also, they've gone into receivership. I believe that means that another company could buy the business and keep it going? Hopefully...