Sound Devices: 302 versus MixPre

Gareth Watkins · July 22nd, 2007, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ty Ford

It's not a Premix, its a MixPre.

Unless, after seeing what side of the road you drive on over there, they changed the name for the UK.

The MixPre ONLY has line level outs. The 302 offers mic or line AND the 302 also has input trim controls whereas the MixPre does not.

Regards,

Ty Ford

LOL Ty

Yep sorry Ty you're right..(been drinking too much Rosé..Dyslexia rools KO!!)... and even if I've not driven on the left in 20 years... we're on the right here in good ol' France...

In real terms line out is fine in most circumstances... especially when you see the cost difference between the two items...
the question really is..
Do I need to pay for the extra functions?

Sound Devices are all excellent pieces of kit.. what ever I find the MIXPRE brilliant!!!

Gareth

Ty Ford · July 22nd, 2007, 08:53 AM

"Do I need to pay for the extra functions?

Well if you NEVER expect to plug into a camera that only has Mic level inputs, you'll be OK. I have a Canon XL2. It only has mic ins.

If you NEVER expect to have more than two people talking, then you don't need the third input.

The input trims are a nice feature, but not absolutely required.

I'm sure there are other functional differences, but I don't remember the details. Check out the reviews of each device I have written in my Reviews_Gear_Other folder.

Regards,

Ty Ford

Gareth Watkins · July 22nd, 2007, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ty Ford

"Do I need to pay for the extra functions?

Well if you NEVER expect to plug into a camera that only has Mic level inputs, you'll be OK. I have a Canon XL2. It only has mic ins.

If you NEVER expect to have more than two people talking, then you don't need the third input.

The input trims are a nice feature, but not absolutely required.

I'm sure there are other functional differences, but I don't remember the details. Check out the reviews of each device I have written in myReviews_Gear_Other folder.

Well in some ways the "Do I need to pay for the extra functions?" IS the question... budgets are budgets when shooting semi pro or low end pro video... I couldn't afford the 302..period..
BUT I have yet to be in a situation in 2 years of 'my' type usage when I need more than 2 mic inputs... mostly coz I only have 2 sets of radio mics and two shot guns...

It is really like the same situation a guy with a 402 faces when he needs to record 5 people...
It is all really horses for courses... the user needs to ask the question "What do I need my gear to do?"
If he has an XL2 and needs to shoot three guys... then it's obviously a 302.
If he has 'most' other hi end cameras (even my humble Sony 950 took line input) and only needs a boom op or max two people then the MIXPRE is an economic quality option.... that is my point.

I appreciate very much your input Ty (as a pro) so don't get my wrong here. When I asked your advice in the past it was spot on and very helpful every time.... I'm just putting the 'needs be' option and with my set up of:
Sony Z1
2x Sennheiser G2's and/or 2x Shotgun mics the Mix pre is an excellent choice.

cheers
Gareth

Brooks Harrington · July 22nd, 2007, 09:33 AM

I'm considering the same.... Mixpre or 302..... And it's going to be the 302.
You could do a double system with this 302, has an extra lines out, and still send mic or line to a video camera. Seems like more people are in such a hurry and want it right on the camera...... I wondering if these same people really take the time to log all their footage or they just start wacking away at it..... sorry... off topic... anyway, 302 is more fexible. Limiter adjustable.

Jeffery Magat · July 22nd, 2007, 10:50 AM

You guys forgot about the 302's input 4/5.

Ty Ford · July 22nd, 2007, 11:56 AM

Hey,

Stop bustin' my chops! I told him where he could get to my complete reviews.

Ty Ford

Peter Moretti · July 22nd, 2007, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ty Ford

Peter,

That's what a location audio mixer (and most mixers) typically do; mix X number of channels to a stereo mix. That's why it's called a mixer.

If you had three inputs and three outputs, you really wouldn't be mixing annything. Pluse you wouldn't be able to record three channels to your camers.

Well you can record four tracks to some cameras, but that not a mix either.

Regards,

TyFord

Ty, please don't shoot me in the head, but isn't the idea to have as many separate tracks as possible?

So if I record two lavs and a boom by putting each lav on a separate track and the boom on both, doesn't that make editing each lav's audio more difficult? Or is does this really not create much of a difficulty?

Thanks!

Ty Ford · July 22nd, 2007, 06:45 PM

I wouldn't put a lav on each track AND a boom on both (or boom to either), unless the director forced me to do it. This, of course, if you were covering two talent.

If you did have three talent, and forced me to do it, I'd ask which one was most important and put him/her probably on one mic on one track and the others on the other track.

If I had a boom op and was mixing three mics for a movie dialog track, I might have three wireless mixed to dual mono or maybe split tracks as I did above.

If it was a big movie, I'd probably do a mono mix and also do separate tracks on a separate recorder.

Make any sense?

Regards,

Ty Ford

Peter Moretti · July 25th, 2007, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ty Ford

I wouldn't put a lav on each track AND a boom on both (or boom to either), unless the director forced me to do it. This, of course, if you were covering two talent.

If you did have three talent, and forced me to do it, I'd ask which one was most important and put him/her probably on one mic on one track and the others on the other track.

If I had a boom op and was mixing three mics for a movie dialog track, I might have three wireless mixed to dual mono or maybe split tracks as I did above.

If it was a big movie, I'd probably do a mono mix and also do separate tracks on a separate recorder.

Make any sense?

Regards,

Ty Ford

Actually, I'm still a little confused, sorry. I'll be posting a new thread in this subforum explaining the setups I'm anticipating.

Thanks for all your help!

Jase Tanner · August 17th, 2007, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Epstein

Steve,
My reading of Page 14 of the manual and the Note is the reference level generated by the mixer is adjustable from 0 to +4DB but the actual mixer Line Level is not changed from 0DB. They also say use this is if you are going to analog cameras. I am sure this is going to become more common since the digital age likes to make up rules based on 0 as 0 rather than some archaic standard where 0 = +4. This setting may still be a useful solution for those people interfacing with Canon Cameras.

I have the Mixpre and recently purchased the Canon XH A1. Using the Mixpre with the line in on the camera results in too low a signal. (no such issue when I use it with my PD 150) I have been in touch with the retailer I bought the camera from who is waiting to hear back from Canon on this. I have read other threads on this site which speak of the same issue with a Canon.

I'm thinking the last line in the above quote suggests that the line level on Canons need a stronger signal, that this a known fact. If someone could confirm or dispute this, that would be great.

My workaround has been to put a 50 dB pad and then go into the mike input on the Canon. If someone has a better suggestion, I'd like to hear it.

Elsewhere in this thread, someone makes reference to adjusting the line output on the mixer but I think this only is possible on the 302. Or is there a way to do it with the Mixpre?

Many thanks

Steve House · August 17th, 2007, 01:50 PM

You might try going from the MixPre Tape Out to the camera's RCA jack Audio In.

I haven't used that camera but Canon's specs call for +6dBV as the nominal level for the XLR set for line in and auto mode. That works our do +8.4 dBU, quite a bit hotter than a standard pro line level of +4dBU, and much hotter than the nominal 0dBU that's becoming commonplace on a lot of gear like the 302 these days,

Martin Pauly · August 17th, 2007, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brooks Harrington

You could do a double system with this 302, has an extra lines out, and still send mic or line to a video camera.

That sounds like a very handy feature. Looking at the 302's manual (I don't have one yet), I believe you are referring to the TA3 connector, right? How would I go about connecting that to an audio recorder, i.e. what kind of adapter would I need to do that? Or would you send the TA3 output to the camera and the XLR master outputs to the audio recorder?

Thanks,
Martin

Brooks Harrington · August 17th, 2007, 04:18 PM

Yes, the 302 has 2 channel -10 (-15 in manual) unbalanced on the TA3 connector. You need a TA3F connector and then you need to make the cable.
PITA. Set the 302 on Full Code output tone (+20) and adjust the backup recorder to 0dbfs.
I love this Full Code out tone, as these little cameras are often not marked with a level scale, just some bars or lights.

Download manual here.

http://www.sounddevices.com/download/guides/302_en.pdf

Ty Ford · August 17th, 2007, 04:59 PM

You can also buy the cords made up from Sound Devices.

Regards,

Ty Ford

TingSern Wong · August 18th, 2007, 12:47 AM

I have both a MixPre and a 422. The 422 is heavy, but takes 4 inputs. I use it for concert halls and places where weight is not a premium. The sound quality of the 422 and MixPre are about the same - to my ears. 422 uses 4 AAs whereas the MixPre only 2 AAs.

The MixPre - in my long usage of it (about 3 years now) - the batteries (2 AA) lasts (for me) more than 24 hours continuous use. I use Sanyo NiMh - 2700mAh batteries for that. I see posts saying the MixPre batteries don't last that long. That's not to my experience. Also, the MixPre is extremely light compared with the 422.

Haven't played with 302.

July 22nd, 2007, 08:53 AM	#17
Ty Ford Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD USA Posts: 2,337	"Do I need to pay for the extra functions? Well if you NEVER expect to plug into a camera that only has Mic level inputs, you'll be OK. I have a Canon XL2. It only has mic ins. If you NEVER expect to have more than two people talking, then you don't need the third input. The input trims are a nice feature, but not absolutely required. I'm sure there are other functional differences, but I don't remember the details. Check out the reviews of each device I have written in my Reviews_Gear_Other folder. Regards, Ty Ford __________________ Ty Ford's Audio Bootcamp Field Guide Ty Ford's Audio Video Blog

July 22nd, 2007, 11:56 AM	#21
Ty Ford Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD USA Posts: 2,337	Hey, Stop bustin' my chops! I told him where he could get to my complete reviews. Ty Ford __________________ Ty Ford's Audio Bootcamp Field Guide Ty Ford's Audio Video Blog

July 22nd, 2007, 06:45 PM	#23
Ty Ford Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD USA Posts: 2,337	I wouldn't put a lav on each track AND a boom on both (or boom to either), unless the director forced me to do it. This, of course, if you were covering two talent. If you did have three talent, and forced me to do it, I'd ask which one was most important and put him/her probably on one mic on one track and the others on the other track. If I had a boom op and was mixing three mics for a movie dialog track, I might have three wireless mixed to dual mono or maybe split tracks as I did above. If it was a big movie, I'd probably do a mono mix and also do separate tracks on a separate recorder. Make any sense? Regards, Ty Ford __________________ Ty Ford's Audio Bootcamp Field Guide Ty Ford's Audio Video Blog

August 17th, 2007, 01:50 PM	#26
Steve House Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada Posts: 5,742	You might try going from the MixPre Tape Out to the camera's RCA jack Audio In. I haven't used that camera but Canon's specs call for +6dBV as the nominal level for the XLR set for line in and auto mode. That works our do +8.4 dBU, quite a bit hotter than a standard pro line level of +4dBU, and much hotter than the nominal 0dBU that's becoming commonplace on a lot of gear like the 302 these days, __________________ Good news, Cousins! This week's chocolate ration is 15 grams!

August 17th, 2007, 04:59 PM	#29
Ty Ford Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD USA Posts: 2,337	You can also buy the cords made up from Sound Devices. Regards, Ty Ford __________________ Ty Ford's Audio Bootcamp Field Guide Ty Ford's Audio Video Blog

July 22nd, 2007, 09:33 AM	#19
Brooks Harrington Regular Crew Join Date: May 2007 Location: Pasadena, CA Posts: 152	I'm considering the same.... Mixpre or 302..... And it's going to be the 302. You could do a double system with this 302, has an extra lines out, and still send mic or line to a video camera. Seems like more people are in such a hurry and want it right on the camera...... I wondering if these same people really take the time to log all their footage or they just start wacking away at it..... sorry... off topic... anyway, 302 is more fexible. Limiter adjustable.

July 22nd, 2007, 10:50 AM	#20
Jeffery Magat Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Toronto, ON Posts: 186	You guys forgot about the 302's input 4/5.

August 17th, 2007, 04:18 PM	#28
Brooks Harrington Regular Crew Join Date: May 2007 Location: Pasadena, CA Posts: 152	Yes, the 302 has 2 channel -10 (-15 in manual) unbalanced on the TA3 connector. You need a TA3F connector and then you need to make the cable. PITA. Set the 302 on Full Code output tone (+20) and adjust the backup recorder to 0dbfs. I love this Full Code out tone, as these little cameras are often not marked with a level scale, just some bars or lights. Download manual here. http://www.sounddevices.com/download/guides/302_en.pdf

August 18th, 2007, 12:47 AM	#30
TingSern Wong Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Singapore, Rep of SINGAPORE Posts: 749	I have both a MixPre and a 422. The 422 is heavy, but takes 4 inputs. I use it for concert halls and places where weight is not a premium. The sound quality of the 422 and MixPre are about the same - to my ears. 422 uses 4 AAs whereas the MixPre only 2 AAs. The MixPre - in my long usage of it (about 3 years now) - the batteries (2 AA) lasts (for me) more than 24 hours continuous use. I use Sanyo NiMh - 2700mAh batteries for that. I see posts saying the MixPre batteries don't last that long. That's not to my experience. Also, the MixPre is extremely light compared with the 422. Haven't played with 302.