Double-system audio methodology
carlmart
I need to get to a double-system audio routine, that will let me
record HDV video with higher quality audio. But at the same time I
want to preserve portability and minimum crew.
This setup will be used on several interviews I will be doing on some
documentaries I will be directing, and also on a multi-camera project
where I will be handling one of the cameras. On the latter I won't be
directing, so I will be doubling as sound-recordist, with a boom-man
picking the main audio.
All the audio will be recorded on a non-TC based CF portable, like a
Zoom H4 or Edirol R-09. This unit should be small and not very
expensive, that's why some recorders like the Tascam HD-PD2 or the SD
744T are not options.
As the cameras we will be using are Sony Z1s, two or three each time.
As using traditional time code routines won't be an option, due to the
cameras and recorder we will be using, I would like some suggestions
on my options. Here are some I thought about:
1) The simple one. Using a "beeping box", like old-timers will
remember from 16mm documentary times. A small box was linked to the
Nagra, you pressed a button which activated a beep on the audio and a
small light flashed. Beep and flash were later used to sync audio and
film. A better version used a large numbers counter, which helped
doing several takes. Every shot will need the recordist to voice the
shot number on the recorder.
2) The clapper. Using a Denecke clapper, which would show the time-
code numbers for everyone to sync on. Rather dificult to voice
something here.
3) The short TC bursts. This could be used if we could extract the TC
from the cameras somehow, which would demand some sort of interface to
convert LAN code onto SMPTE TC. It would also demand a TC machine in
post to re-strip the whole TC track from the initial TC bursts. Using
several cameras complicates this issue.
4) The TC audio track. This would demand recording a continuous TC,
sent from a central generator, on all cameras and recorder. That
wouldn't be much of a problem on video cameras, but it would eliminate
one audio track. It would demand a TC recorder, like the Tascam P2,
and several wired/wireless links to the cameras to send the TC. Having
several jammable TC boxes on each camera would be an option too.
These are the options I can think of. Can anyone suggest any other?
Jeff C
Without Time Code... or even with it... seems like the clapper or some
sort of bloop is a common method ... poor mans version, a disposable
flash camera. This works well on multi cam shoots.
J
carlmart
> Without Time Code... or even with it... seems like the clapper or some
> sort of bloop is a common method ... poor mans version, a disposable
> flash camera. This works well on multi cam shoots.
You mean the flash to sync the multi-cameras. But I need a sync to the
sound too.
The TC clapper would be my main choice, but I find the clap sound to
be a bit intimidating or distracting or intrusive for doc work.
Eric Toline
Re: Double-system audio methodology
Group: rec.arts.movies.production.sound Date: Wed, Feb 14, 2007, 5:01am
(EST-3) From: carl...@centroin.com.br (carlmart)
You mean the flash to sync the multi-cameras. But I need a sync to the
sound too.
The TC clapper would be my main choice, but I find the clap sound to be
a bit intimidating or distracting or intrusive for doc work.<<<<<<<
You can have all the cameras shoot the boom op tapping the mic. That
will give you an audio & video sync point.
Eric
Oleg Kaizerman
recording directly to the camera with good mixer in front :-)
--
regular slate as you need to sync free non tc devices at ones
--
Oleg Kaizerman(gebe) Hollyland
"carlmart" <carl...@centroin.com.br> wrote in message
news:1171455985....@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
Oleg Kaizerman
preamp and long time to sync it op on nle
but if you buy 702 t or tascam with external generator /smart slate (with
702 t you dont need tc slate , freerun and slate every couple of hours)
and sell it after work you will loose about the same you where invest in
cheap stuff and get better results
if you have tc cameras ( free run ) its just not smart not to use it
my 2 shekels
--
Oleg Kaizerman(gebe) Hollyland
"Oleg Kaizerman" <kaiz...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:45d31e9a$0$97244$892e...@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
sdfaudio
that read TC from a LANC or 1394.
Like Oleg states, recording direct to the camera with a high quality
mic & mixer front -end via line-level (AGC off) will sound acceptable
in most field interview situations.
If your thinking of a TC slate, that would cost more than the Tascam.
The small bloop slate used to work in the ol' film days.
Tapping the mic or a hand clap on camera works also.
carlmart
> If you've been following this group, no one yet has found a device
> that read TC from a LANC or 1394.
I am aware of that. I myself named in the past days here a LANC
converter that is not made anymore. But you never know: there might be
one hiding somewhere. :)
> Like Oleg states, recording direct to the camera with a high quality
> mic & mixer front -end via line-level (AGC off) will sound acceptable
> in most field interview situations.
I don't agree with Oleg. I am not looking for acceptable or good
enough, which I think it's what HVD's MPEG can provide. I am sure a
better quality can be obtained using one of these external recorders I
mentioned. Have you tried latest Sony's, PCM capable, Hi-MD MDs? You
are in for a surprise. This test I already did, as I have an RH10.
Please do not disregard these CF recorders just because they do not
cost thousand of dollars.
> If your thinking of a TC slate, that would cost more than the Tascam.
I suggested that because I already have the Denecke slate. I have an
audio equipment rental business here in Brazil. So I do have the "big
guys" equipment that I can use. I am just looking for new choices.
> The small bloop slate used to work in the ol' film days.
Yes, it was very practical. I would like to have a set of lit numbers
now.
> Tapping the mic or a hand clap on camera works also.
This is going to be a feature film for theatrical release. So the main
mic will be on a boom: tapping would be a bit difficult. You can do
that when you are working with your mic close to you. We are also
talking of many shots, not just one.
And I would like to have something more "organized" than hand
clapping.
carlmart
> i dont know ho much you are going to invest in cheap recorders ,aditional
> preamp and long time to sync it op on nle
Working with non TC cameras and double-system audio will inevitably
add more time to sync in editing. But I am looking for a mid-term
solution. If there is one.
> but if you buy 702 t or tascam with external generator /smart slate (with
> 702 t you dont need tc slate , freerun and slate every couple of hours)
I believe in separate units for mix and recording. I am not sure the
external generator solution is the one. The 702T is a better
alternative to the Tascam, much smaller. But costing about 10 times
the price of any of these "cheap recorders".
There will be a lot of time for tests, so I will try different
options. Also comparing a recording of the same mic on an SD 744T and
on one of these recorders.
The first test will be comparing the 744T with a Sony RH10 Hi-MD
recording in PCM.
> and sell it after work you will loose about the same you where invest in
> cheap stuff and get better results
Things do not work very much like that over here.
I am not asking anyone to agree or not with my recorder options, at
least not on this thread. Or to agree with me that MPEG audio sucks.
Those are my opinions.
What I am asking for are suggestions to work out a practical sync
routine.
> if you have tc cameras ( free run ) its just not smart not to use it
If I had TC cameras we wouldn't be discussing this. If you can't jam
the cameras between them and to the audio recorder, it's free run.
What I wonder is how we can control that free run.
Charles Tomaras
> mic will be on a boom: tapping would be a bit difficult. You can do
> that when you are working with your mic close to you. We are also
> talking of many shots, not just one.
>
> And I would like to have something more "organized" than hand
> clapping.
If this is a feature film "video" with multiple cameras and a boom operator,
what is preventing you from just clapping a good old fashioned full sized
slate with scene and take number on it? That system has worked PERFECTLY for
far longer than most of us have been alive. Simple, cheap, effective. Works
with ANY recorder and ANY camera.
Tim Gray
> If this is a feature film "video" with multiple cameras and a boom operator,
> what is preventing you from just clapping a good old fashioned full sized
> slate with scene and take number on it? That system has worked PERFECTLY for
> far longer than most of us have been alive. Simple, cheap, effective. Works
> with ANY recorder and ANY camera.
I'm not a professional at this, but I do have a 702t (previously a
722) and have worked on some documentary stuff and narrative stuff
with non-TC cameras (HDV and DV).
Old fashion slate works fine. You can always do it at the end of a
take to be a bit less disruptive. Or the bloop box as you yourself
mentioned. I personally worked on several projects with the 722 with
a standard slate and everything was great - as Charles mentioned
above, it is perfectly fine.
To remark on the comment about buying something nice then selling it,
I had the 722 for a year and sold it for $200 less than I bought it
for and replaced it with the 702t. 1 years rental time for $200 -
good stuff.
In my non-professional opinion, if you going to be messing with
timecode, suck it up and get a camera that accepts timecode, a
timecode recorder, and a smart slate as a backup (which you have).
Otherwise, a simple slate (or bloop) will probably be just as
effective and a lot less hassle.
Oleg Kaizerman
since you do have tc cameras -)
by the way any cheap recorder with good mixer infront (or at least mix
pre ) bring you to about half of what 702 t worth or the same as tascam
that you can go directly.
but since it is your time (and money ) , the cheapest I can suggest you is
the regular sticks on every take since the tc slate has no any benefit at
all ( at least if you dont go with the tascam)
cheap tricks cost you good money in editing prosses ;-)
best
--
Oleg Kaizerman(gebe) Hollyland
carlmart
> what is preventing you from just clapping a good old fashioned full sized
> slate with scene and take number on it? That system has worked PERFECTLY for
> far longer than most of us have been alive. Simple, cheap, effective. Works
> with ANY recorder and ANY camera.
Good point that I left unexplained. The situations we will be shooting
with multiple cameras won't let us a clapper. Minimal crew, many
people to be shot. Situations will be mostly quase-religious, so you
can't "polute" the plce with clappers clapping, right?
carlmart
> but since it is your time (and money ) , the cheapest I can suggest you is
> the regular sticks on every take since the tc slate has no any benefit at
> all ( at least if you dont go with the tascam)
> cheap tricks cost you good money in editing prosses ;-)
As I said above, sticks noise may be too intrusive. So it seems as
though the bloop light might be the way to go.
d rosen
understanding no slate for docs.
but you can use the free run on z1s (and maybe even time of day on
recorder if the files have this data) and calibrate the offset with a
clap every few hours, like oleg says.
decent mixer after mic/s will do more for you sound than relying on
the front end of a cheap recorder.
i run a 302 and a mt24/96 (h4, hi-md, etc would be good in this
context too). i go hard wire to camera most times (when i can), but i
would send audio via wireless if i needed to. if i have 1 spare radio
only, 1 channel from the mixer to camera is still good (i send the
personal mics and use camera mic on other channel). because after
smart slate and clap this is easiest way to sync double system in
post, ('mod-match'). you also get to compare the difference between
the z1 and your recorder in a real world scenario, the difference may
be less than you mind.
d.
even if you can only get cheap radios you can get mod-match between
the drop outs.
Oleg Kaizerman
and you dont need slates at all ( of course if you will remeber open the
camera mic) :-)
--
Oleg Kaizerman(gebe) Hollyland
"carlmart" <carl...@centroin.com.br> wrote in message
news:1171479664.3...@v45g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
yepthisi...@gmail.com
(or at least mix
pre ) bring you to about half of what 702 t worth
and to quote
Tim grey
To remark on the comment about buying something nice then selling it,
I had the 722 for a year and sold it for $200 less than I bought it
for and replaced it with the 702t. 1 years rental time for $200 -
good stuff.
These statements atleast to me sum up the whole argument.
ian
carlmart
> understanding no slate for docs.
> but you can use the free run on z1s (and maybe even time of day on
> recorder if the files have this data) and calibrate the offset with a
> clap every few hours, like oleg says.
A good idea.
> decent mixer after mic/s will do more for you sound than relying on
> the front end of a cheap recorder.
Who says I am relying on the front end of the CF recorder? My plan is
to use an SD Mixpre.
That doesn't mean that I will not test my other options, like the
recorder inputs, to see if they can be used sometime.
> i run a 302 and a mt24/96 (h4, hi-md, etc would be good in this
> context too). i go hard wire to camera most times (when i can), but i
> would send audio via wireless if i needed to. if i have 1 spare radio
> only, 1 channel from the mixer to camera is still good (i send the
> personal mics and use camera mic on other channel). because after
> smart slate and clap this is easiest way to sync double system in
> post, ('mod-match'). you also get to compare the difference between
> the z1 and your recorder in a real world scenario, the difference may
> be less than you mind.
I will only go hardwire. Each camera will have it's own better quality
in a proper suspension, to add an eventual closer audio effect
sometime.
But the main camera may get the principal audio on some situations
too.
> even if you can only get cheap radios you can get mod-match between
> the drop outs.
Recording double-system should protect the shooting from HDV
dropouts.
William
"4) The TC audio track. This would demand recording a continuous TC,
sent from a central generator, on all cameras and recorder. That
wouldn't be much of a problem on video cameras, but it would
eliminate
one audio track. It would demand a TC recorder, like the Tascam P2,
and several wired/wireless links to the cameras to send the TC.
Having
several jammable TC boxes on each camera would be an option too. "
I know this option 4 is possible with DV cameras that record
uncompressed audio but will it work with the compressed audio track of
HDV? Can a NLE read a TC signal that was compressed?
William
blestage
carlmart wrote:
> 1) The simple one. Using a "beeping box", like old-timers will
> remember from 16mm documentary times. A small box was linked to the
> Nagra, you pressed a button which activated a beep on the audio and a
> small light flashed. Beep and flash were later used to sync audio and
> film. A better version used a large numbers counter, which helped
> doing several takes. Every shot will need the recordist to voice the
> shot number on the recorder.
Check this out:
http://users.aol.com/fmgp/sync7.htm
Also, you may want to call PSC (Professional Sound Corporation) and
ask them about their Bloop Light. It may still be available.
Best,
--
Brent
Charles Tomaras
"William" <Avat...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1171499887....@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
Well I regularly compress timecode into one audio channel of as low as
64kbps stereo MP3 for transcription and they have no problems reading it for
their purposes. Whether or not there would be issues trying to sync with it
I cannot say, but certainly with the high bitrates of the compressed audio
of HDV I wouldn't think it would be an issue. Timecode is pretty tenacious.
ittam...@gmail.com
that read TC from a LANC or 1394."
I remember Rosenthal has / had an unit for this.
Matti
> "William" <Avata...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1171499887....@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.
>
> - Näytä siteerattu teksti -
ittam...@gmail.com
ittam...@gmail.com
Sorry the double posting
carlmart
> I know this option 4 is possible with DV cameras that record
> uncompressed audio but will it work with the compressed audio track of
> HDV? Can a NLE read a TC signal that was compressed?
Good point. But I did record TC stream in minidisc some time ago, for
a test, and they played fine on the Denecke slate, with no frame loss.
So I think it would work fine on the HDV.
carlmart
> Check this out:
>
> http://users.aol.com/fmgp/sync7.htm
>
> Also, you may want to call PSC (Professional Sound Corporation) and
> ask them about their Bloop Light. It may still be available.
Thanks for the suggestion. For that kind of money I will make one
myself. I'd buy one ready-made if it was selling for $50 or so.
Steve House
ago, they advised me that they're no longer making the various LANC
and video to TC and Wordclock readers. (Although they are still shown
on their website's product list.) In any case, they were full-sized AC
powered devices and not as readily field portable as you'd want for a
doco shoot.
Mike Handler
> remember from 16mm documentary times. <<
"Old-timers" ?!?!
Bite me, youngster.
I'm not the one trying to re-invent the wheel.
Jeff C
> > Without Time Code... or even with it... seems like the clapper or some
> > sort of bloop is a common method ... poor mans version, a disposable
> > flash camera. This works well on multi cam shoots.
>
> You mean the flash to sync the multi-cameras. But I need a sync to the
> sound too.
>
> The TC clapper would be my main choice, but I find the clap sound to
> be a bit intimidating or distracting or intrusive for doc work.
Simply close mic the camera as you would a clapper... the shutter
sound and flash are usually 1/60 to 125th of a second. About 8
bucks... and the flash will click and pop long after the film is
gone..
I love these threads... I still remain optimistic that the wheel could
be rounder <GGG>
j
Marty
G. John Garrett, C.A.S
> What about these two?
> http://zeitx.com/site3/lanclump.htm
Zeitx has owed me a lanc lump since last April, FWIW.
John