Choosing a Solid State Sound Recorder for Film Production
 

I'm looking for a good quality solid state field recorder for film making and currently have a choice between the following units:

Sound Devices 702 - £1800
Tascam HD-P2 - about £900
Fostex Fr-2 - about £900
Fostex Fr-2 LE - about £500

Though perhaps there are similarly priced units out there that are better?

I will be recording to CompactFlash memory cards. I can afford at most the Sound Devices 702, but would rather save the extra expense to buy other equipment if the other units are comparable in quality and adaptability.

Up until now I've had my Audiotechnika At815b shotgun mic plugged via XLR cable into my XH-A1 camera. This has proven inconvenient as to alter levels the sound engineer has to use the levels dial on the camera. And the mic has to remain plugged into the camera at all times which makes many shots difficult because of problems with cable reach - especially for tracking, steadicam or handheld shots.

I will initially only use a single shotgun mic but in future may want to use Lavaliers or stereo recording. The unit I will buy needs to be carried by the sound engineer in a pouch and must have levels control. I don't want to have to connect other preamp or power supply units to it making it more bulky. Good battery lasting power would be useful but it's not critical.

I'm an amateur filmmaker wanting to get as professional results as I can without spending enormous sums of money on equipment. I've been trawling the net and DVi all day trying to work out which field mixer to buy, but often opinion varies from site to site and I've just ended up with a headache.

Can anyone help me decide which field mixer to purchase?

Thanks!

I've had good results with the Fostex FR2, and better results with the SD702(T) which is currently my weapon of choice for two-channel double-system w/TC.

Both have good pre-amps, but the SD702 has better ergonomics, easier to use, sturdy build, superior limiters, superior battery life, smaller form factor (not sure if it's smaller than the FR2-LE though).

The FR2 is like a metal framed hollow plastic box. The SD702 is a solid metal brick in comparison (not in function!!).

Get what you pay for, though diminishing returns may mean the FR2-LE is your best choice paired with Schoeps mics or whatever. If the FR2-LE was available when I bought the FR2, I'm sure I would have bought the FR2-LE instead. I stepped up to the 702T for it's TC capability (note that 702 does not have TC) and superior limiting when compared to the FR2 (you just don't know when you'll need good limiters, esp. on run-and-gun indie shoots)

I've heard stories about the Tascam being an ergonomic nightmare, but no first hand experience. I think it has TC of some description, but not as flexible/standard as the 702T.

Stuart you should also seriously consider adding the Edirol R44 to this list.
Great 4 channel XLR recorder, with real nice quite pre amps.

Edirol / Roland | R-44 Solid-State Four-Channel Portable | R-44

Thanks for the info guys

Mike Peter Read: Is there much difference between the Fostex FR-2 and the FR-2 LE?

I read in one thread that the FR-2 LE has lower noise, but in another someone said the FR-2 had better preamps, I don't know which to believe.

Michael Liebergot: The Edirol R-44 looks like a nice unit, very reasonably priced, do you have one?

Sound Devices 702 - £1800
Tascam HD-P2 - about £900
Fostex Fr-2 - about £900
Fostex Fr-2 LE - about £500
Edirol R-44 - about £600

So it's now a choice between the above 5 recorders, but which is the best bang for buck?

I recently purchased the Edirol R-44.

The preamps seem to be very quiet. It has phantom power and will run about 3.3 hours using 2100 mAh NiMh batteries and one of the channels powering a 48-volt phantom-powered mic. I have it set to embed time-of-day timecode in a BWF file.

Volume knobs are very easy to get at. The LCD readout seems very clear. The build quality seems to be solid enough.

Again, I just got this the other week and haven't used it in the field yet. I'm building a weatherproof box to allow me to use it on small boats in salt water.

It may be more expensive, but, for my $$$ I LOVE my Sound Devices 702.

No contest:

Sound Devices is the best recorder on your list. You get what you pay for and the pros use the SD for the most part. All of the others work fine but the Sound Devices is built better, operates more logically and sounds slightly better than any of the others.

Dan

Thanks for all your input guys. The Sound Devices 702 is obviously the best choice. But if I can only afford to get one of the cheaper sound recorders (this depends if I get any grant money for my next film) which of the other 4 should I get?

Tascam HD-P2 - about £900
Fostex Fr-2 - about £900
Fostex Fr-2 LE - about £500
Edirol R-44 - about £600

The SD 702 is a great recorder for sure. But if your only mic is a AT 815, I would re-consider money allocation.

Do you think a cheaper recorder and a new mic would be a better investment Rick?

Stuart, It would be far better investment if you spend more for a new better mic than recorder.

Does the R-44 record 4 seperate channels or are they mixed on the SD card?

Thanks Jun Na, I think you are probably right. I'll look at the shotgun microphone threads.

Good point Ben. It's not easy to tell which of these sound recorders record on seperate tracks, I'd much rather record seperate tracks if possible. Do any of them record separate files/channels?

The R-44 records four discrete channels. It looks like it'll record about 11 hours of 4-track audio at 48 kHz at 16-bit depth.

Hi Stuart,

I have the Tascam recorder. Albeit I'm with the majority when they put SD on top of the list, I've also had the same problem as you choosing a solid state recorder: Price vs Performance!

If the SD recorder is the best here (no doubt), I'm certain that it isn't 900 pounds better than the Tascam recorder. I've tested several recorders in the same conditions with the best sound recorder we have in the country (he's all over the major Portuguese projects, many of them for Manoel de Oliveira which is a renown international director).

He uses SD but he has the money for it. Nonetheless, when comparing SD, Fostex, Edirol, and Tascam, we came to these findings:

- SD: Best preamps, best construction, TC in/Gen capabilities but the most expensive here by a large amount.
- Fostex FR2: Good preamps, very good construction. TC capabilities will cost you an additional 500 pounds!!! It will make Fostex receive and Generate TC though.
- Tascam: Good preamps (even slightly better than Fostex's), but inferior constrution. You have TC capabilities out of the box but no Gen facilities. It will Jam to any device though.
- Edirol: The worst preamps of the lot! But it compensates that with the 4 inputs if you need them.
Fostex FR2 LE: A good prosumer model but in another league. It doesn't and can't have TC. For the budget, good preamps compared with, say, Zoom H4. If you consider buying it, you definitely will need a mixer in front. A decent one (mixpre for instance), will cost you another 500 Pounds.

Resuming: I'm very very happy with my Tascam. It already has digital in/outs so it will be prepared for future digital mixers for instance.
It's preamps really shine at 16bit, a bit less at 24 (where the SD shines). It Jams easily to any camera with TC out or GenLock, or any digital slate.
It records internal generated TC even when you don't Jam it and I can say it's crystal internal clock is very accurate.

Hope that helps

I would add the new NAGRA LB to your list - similar price to the SD 702 (£1,600 in the UK).

Very nice machine.

Though I went for it's big brother the Nagra VI (but that's x3 the price).

My vote is Fostex, I sold my Microtrack and moved up to the Fostex FR-2LE. You can hook it up to a extenal power supply and it has a better display. This recorder was made for field recording. Fostex is what the Pro Location Sound guys prefer.

From what I read, the Edirol R-44's preamps aren't perfectly quiet, but according to one user who records concerts the noise floor is below the noise level of the venues in which he records. Also, Oade Brothers offers a modified R-44 for about the same price as a new one, and the preamps are rebuilt to make them a lot quieter.

Ordering for Oade Brothers Audio: Edirol R44 Super MOD- Ground Shipping

For my own work, the situations are generally "real life", and the ambient noise is far above the preamp noise floor of the R-44. I believe it's also lower than my camera, a Sony EX1.

THis is for Mr. Willett,

How do you like your Nagra VI? I saw it at NAB and am very interested in knowing how the mic preamps stack up against Sound Devices and THe Zaxcom Deva?

I hope to do a lot of nature audio recording and need the best possible pre amps to work with my neumann and schoeps mics.

TIA,

Jacques

Pardon me if this is a dumb question, but if you use one of these recorders, do you still need a mixer (assuming your not exceeding the inputs/channels)?

Paul:

That would probably depend on what you are recording, are you recording yourself while doing other operations, if you have a sound person, how many cameras you need to route your output to, etc.

If you are a sound mixer, yes, you would want to use a separate mixer whenever possible. Better controls, panning, cuts, shelving and or roll off filters, more routing options to multiple cameras besides the recorder, etc.

OTOH, if you are scraping buy with a camera with bad sound quality recording as many of them have, a recorder even without a good mixer would provide a noticeable boost in sound quality.

Depends on you and what you are trying to accomplish.

Dan

Paul Cascio: That's a coincidence I was just thinking the same thing myself!

Dan Brockett: What if you do have a sound man, can you just use a sound recorder without a mixer? Will a mixer make any difference?

Previously I thought of just controlling levels on the sound recorder and not bothering with a mixer. If you need both that's going to cost megabucks for two decent quality units.

Dean, if you record in the same circumstances with it and with the others you will notice the Edirol's noisier preamps. Of course this is in direct comparison with the others. Nonetheless, it's a great recorder and many guys are using them with success.

Oade Brothers are really known for their mods and for what I read they do work. Shame that their export costs are so high for a guy like me living in Europe.

About your EX1, any of these recorders will beat EX1's preamps hands down.

Yes it will. Remember everyone here saying that SD has the better preamps of the lot? SD mixers - for instance - are dedicated preamps, so you can imagine that SD has put all their experience and know how in those boxes!

In that respect, I'm a lucky guy. I have an SD 302 borrowed from the guy I told you in my previous post just because he has bought a newer model for him.
I have to say that the SD 302 in front of my Tascam makes a big difference, one that you will notice on every sound recorded. Even so because the Tascam preamps don't like 24bits a lot, and the SD in front makes all the difference preamping 24bit files.

The Nagre VI pre-amps are the best there are - they are superb - I would say certainly better than the SD (and still saying that the SD is an excellent machine and the SD better than the Deva). The ADC and DAC in the Nagra VI are also superb state-of-the art.

Nagra have been #1 in portables ever since Stefan Kudelski won the first ever International Recording Contest in 1952 with the very first Nagra recorder.

I am absolutely delighted with my Nagra VI - it was a lot of money for me as I'm only semi-pro and only use it in my spare time - but it was worth every penny and I like it more every time I use it. I have set it to automatically back-up to CF while recording, so at the end of the day I have a complete back-up of all the takes on a CF card that I can carry separately from the recorder.

I do mostly classical music recording and need the highest quality and quietest pre-amps available - these are already in the Nagra VI and I don't have to go out and buy esoteric expensive pre-amps as the Nagra ones are equal or better.

I did go for the high-capacity battery option, which will run the Nagra VI for 12-15 hours, so I can use it all day with no fear of the battery running out and I can then charge it overnight to be ready the next morning.

Although the Fostex FR-2LE is an excellent little machine, it is not a patch on the Nagra LB or SD 702/722.

I reviewed the FR-2LE (and the original FR-2) for a broadcast magazine.

I actually bought the original FR-2 when it came out (though now upgraded to the Nagra VI).

My take on the FR-2LE was that it was excellent for the price and was the cheapest machine that I would call "professional". If this is all the money you have, then it's the best option.

If you can afford more, then the Nagra LB or SD 702/722 will pi** all over it.

Hi Stuart:

All of the sound mixers I work with already own mixers, most use the Sound Devices 442 and two of the main mixers I work with also use various SD recorders, one has the 744T and one has the new 788.

I own my own mixer but don't have an SD recorder, I have the Zoom H4N. My mixers mic preamps are of a superior quality to the ones in the H4N.

Do you have to use a mixer? Of course not. Will using a mixer help you to obtain better quality sound? Of course. Will using a mixer make a difference? Definitely.

Dan

Thanks Dan, I'll take your advice. I'm going to get a mixer rather than a recorder now, probably the SD Mix-PRE which looks pretty good from what I've read and it's a good budget(ish) price.

They are really impressive but (and sorry if I'm not totally with you on this), the AATON Cantar has the best preamps of the lot, even better than Nagra's