Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Please, support PV!
It allows to keep PV going, with more focus towards AI, but keeping be one of the few truly independent places.
Sound Devices 633, new mixer and recorder
  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    image

    Key features:

    • Six analog inputs (3+3); three full-featured mic/line preamps plus three line-level inputs, each with dedicated front-panel faders and PFLs
    • 10-track recording, polyphonic or monophonic broadcast WAV files @ 24-bit 48 kHz (96 kHz and 192 kHz sampling for 6 tracks), time code stamped MP3
    • Simultaneous or independent recording to SD and CompactFlash card
    • 6 mix buses, left/right main plus Aux 1/2/3/4
    • PowerSafe Circuitry offers complete file protection from power loss. Ten second internal power reserve closes files and shuts down unit.
    • Quad Powering offers class-leading powering flexibility from four available power types, easily power the 633 for a full production day
    • Two second power on-to-recording. Never wait on sound!
    • AES input, two-channel AES3 or AES42, four channels of AES output
    • Accurate Time Code Master Clock generator and reader, 0.5 frame per day accuracy
    • Clear, fast, easy to navigate controls and interface; visible in all light conditions, configurable metering and display
    • USB Keyboard connection for quick and easy metadata entry.
    • User-configurable headphone presets plus a headphone favorite mode for quick source selection
    • Small, lightweight, compact chassis made from molded, metalized carbon fiber

    http://www.sounddevices.com/download/lit/633_sell_sheet.pdf

    oil17.jpg
    800 x 289 - 52K
  • 19 Replies sorted by
  • IronFilmIronFilm

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1015171-REG/sound_devices_633_6_input_field_production.html http://www.postmagazine.com/Press-Center/Daily-News/2013/Sound-Devices-intros-new-portable-recorder-mixer.aspx

    Pricing is $3,095 for the 633 and $3,836.20 for the KIT version. They are available immediately.

    OUCH! Dunno, I reckon my sound knowledge is a bit thin to appreciate the need for spending that much :-/ My more affodable Zoom recorder is good enough for me & all my sound needs for now :-P

  • AlienheadAlienhead

    It wouldn't be more expensive than buying a sound devices 302 and one of their recorders together, which this seems to eliminate the need for.

  • kingmixerkingmixer

    I don't think the price is far enough below their 664. Although I guess they can't price it the same as a 552.

  • DrDaveDrDave

    You could also get a Dr 680 and a pair of matched pair of Schoeps MK41 microphones for the kit price :)

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @DrDave

    Yes, but it is tool aimed at different audience.

  • wordsofpeacewordsofpeace

    I used a 302 + Fostex FR2 for many years, then a 552 came along s/h. TBH it was like chalk and cheese. Not that the 302 or the FR2 are no good, but the ergonomics of the 552 compared to the old set up made my life that much simpler. When you are sole boom, mixer and recorder, having less to worry about makes for a happier life.

  • MikeLinnMikeLinn

  • IronFilmIronFilm

    At the level most of us operate at, I'd guess, the Zoom F8 kills the need to spend up large on the 633. (though I won't deny I wish I had one!)

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @IronFilm

    I think Tascam DR-680 is even more cheap and will also suit perfectly.

  • IronFilmIronFilm

    I own a Tascam DR680 (two even!), and doing sound professionally now, but I undoubtedly can appreciate the benefits of having a Zoom F8 instead! (hopefully next year I'll buy an F4 / F8)

    Kinda funny reading my comments in this thread from three years ago, as now I certainly can appreciate the benefit of a 633 over a Zoom :)

  • DrDaveDrDave

    I'm not an SD fan, but I like the fact that they they are solidly built. Also, they gave some thought on their models to the power supplies. I don't actually know any professionals who use them, but I'm sure they are out there. The noise figure of -126 dBu is really unacceptable for a device in this price range.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @DrDave

    What you mean under

    The noise figure of -126 dBu is really unacceptable for a device in this price range ?

    http://www.avisoft.com/recordertests.htm

  • DrDaveDrDave

    Recorder tests :) I would be very interested to see how they do it, since they can't, AFAIK the AD is coupled by surface mount to the front end. I could be wrong. The noise figure -126 dBu is straight from SD--and we all know manufacturers never exaggerate.

  • tonalttonalt

    I'm a fan of sd. Because kick ass preamps, incredible limiters and build quality. I've tried cheaper stuff and that was just waste of time and money.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @DrDave

    I asked about your phrase, not about how they do it. I want to understand foundations of it.

  • DrDaveDrDave

    The basics of circuit deign were worked out decades ago, and there are some really good ones--like Grace design, Benchmark, Lavry, and so on. Anyone can come along and make a box with world-class specs since all the research has been done already. No one needs to invent anything.Lot of high-end preamps or pre/AD are some of the best sounding boxes you can buy, and have world class specs--at or near the theoretical minimum for noise, THD, transient response, and so on. So when we are looking at a premium box--and SD is way more expensive than most, you just have to wonder why they could build a simple circuit with a noise figure of -129 or better. You also have to note that some reasonably priced boxes get it right, like Fostex.
    SD 633 is 3K+. At that price, the converters should be stellar. After all, Mackie can do it for $99.
    So what to do if you want world class sound? Well, the cheap way is to take a 680 and plug a converter into digital input. Why should we have to do that, it's stupid: tt should be simple for the manufacturers to give us this in one box. The parts are cheap, the design is simple. I can't imagine that someone would want to save $10 on a $3K item, so I hope there is some other explanation.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    I am lost for now.

    SD is considered one of the frequently used preamps/recorders on film shooting. They are made for this.

    What exact if wrong with them? What is so bad with this noise spec?

  • DrDaveDrDave

    There's nothing wrong with it, I'm just saying if I were to spend $3000 on a box like this, I would expect top of the line preamps, noise figures, circuit topology, and so on. If I spend $400, it's a different story, but of course I would prefer top of the line for cheap.
    Also, I'm annoyed that to get a really good sound I have to plug my high end pre into the digital input of the Tascam. I want it in one box. I'm not really annoyed, because it sounds amazing, I just want to hook the thing up and hit the red record button.

  • DrDaveDrDave

    Actually, a modded 70D sounds pretty damn good.

Add a Comment