Jump to content

Darren

Members
  • Posts

    338
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Darren

  1. Currently, I am using a quad unit. Receiving 2 channels of video assist, sending an audio feed for the video assist, and a comtek feed for the village, etc. I have also used my audio baluns as a snake from the set, for playback and video playback. I think that a feed to/from the pro tools operator would be another good use, when applicable. At home, these baluns are practically running my whole house's a/v systems distribution at this point, including a long component video feed to my HD projector that doesn't look any different than the long, heavy, expensive, garden hose diameter component cable that it replaced.
  2. Muxlab's AES digital balun's specs:
  3. Jim, Muxlab's specs: The insertion loss is stated to be less than 1dB for audio. I suppose that if one was so inclined, performing actual lab type measurements would not be that difficult. The video signal is actually much more challenging to send than the audio, as it requires MUCH more bandwidth. The video units are rated at DC - 8 mHz.
  4. This muxlab one (below) is likely more suited for professional AES digital audio. I believe the one above is for "hi-fi" type purposes... http://www.muxlab.com/products/ve_avd_monopro_xlr.html I use a lot of MUXLAB products and have been very happy with them. We did manage to blow one up, along with most everything on the video cart, last year from some bad power. Muxlab cheerfully replaced it under their lifetime warranty program. FYI, many of their video baluns are now available with BNC connections instead of RCA, if you should so desire. On average I've been paying about $60-$65 per balun, but that's for quad baluns. Haven't priced out the digital ones. When you google Muxlab, you'll find many many dealers. Cheers, Darren
  5. Tell the editor to go get cheap mixer that already has AES inputs. That would probably be cheaper and simpler than any conversion box.
  6. Sounds like a plan. And I do respect the fact that you are putting in a lot of legwork to try and educate yourself and others on this issue. The world is full of too many citizens that remain silent and passive, but then complain about the results. All the best! Darren
  7. This wikipedia article was so slanted that it surprised me that it even was allowed to exist. WCB is NOT a "private entity". It is an arm of the BC Provincial Government that was set up to protect workers from injury and or death through education of both workers and employers, and enforcement of safety regulations. Also within its jurisdiction is the rehabilitation of workers. All work place injuries in BC are within the jurisdiction of the WCB "Worker's Compensation Board". If you are injured at work, all of your medical expenses are supposed to be paid for by WCB rather than your Federal or Extended medical insurance. The premiums for this coverage are paid for by assessments and fees levied on every employer.
  8. This is true. Most, but not all, doctor's services and labs, radiology clinics, etc, are privately owned small businesses. However, their rates are not determined by the free market and they are not able to charge whatever they want for their services. The government of each Province sets the rates that they will pay for each type of service. In the case of the doctors, this is done through the collective bargaining process between the Dr.'s associations, such as the BCMA, and the Government. Its possible that this may be why you find some of your medical profession against public health care.
  9. BTW, This is NOT from a government website at all. This is a 100% private site that is not even affiliated with the insurance industry. This site belongs to a marketing company that is trying to generate revenue by selling advertising to the insurance industry.
  10. No worries Richard. My post was written in a calm tone. I don't really do the high blood pressure thing. But that was pretty funny! haha! At any rate, one of the points that I wanted to make is that anyone who is so inclined can go on the internet and find many many quotes to support just about *any* side of *any* argument. We see that all the time. The "information" came from Canada, that is true. But the context, or lack of it, is always a choice that is made by those that use quotes. I know that your quotes have the optics of being from reliable sources. But, as is in the case of the ambulance fees, quotes without any context or details can easily be misleading. The ambulance fee quote provided incomplete information. Yes, its true, you WILL get a bill. But where was the information stating that it was only for $80? The doctors here, and I imagine everywhere else, always have a LOT to say about everything. But as is the case with any labor organization, "some" of what they say has it own agendas, ie to benefit themselves. The CMA, if I'm not mistaken is an association that Dr's may belong to that has lobbying for changes in the healthcare system as one if its main functions. There will always be quotes that are available and appear to support one's argument, but without the rest of the backstory that go with quotes, they risk amounting to sensationalism. I'm not faulting you in any way for sharing what is important to you or what you believe in. It is more than obvious to those of us on the sidelines of this important debate that this is a VERY touchy topic. As well, I doubt if you had any way of even realizing that the ambulance fee, for example, would even require any further explanation. But again, that is the danger of isolated quotes. My main intent was to point out that many of us here are somewhere between laughing, disbelief, and dismay when it comes to watching various people and interest groups attempt to convince others at what a bad system we have here. But the truth is I don't think many people here, except perhaps for the very wealthy, would trade it for anything. So while my main point was to stand up against the misinformation about our system, a byproduct of that is to ask everyone down there that is reading this stuff, and seeing it on the nightly news, to resist being spoon fed your facts and to dig a little deeper and do your *own* research into some of the facts that are being given to you. Your comments on Governmental distrust are very enlightening. I thank you for that food for thought because I hadn't considered that and it does help me to understand some of the events and mindsets that I have seen, but not been able to comprehend. In closing, it is not my goal to lobby on this issue one way or the other. It was my goal to defend the system "here" from misconceptions and misinformation. I am getting pretty tired of that. Perhaps I really shouldn't care; the medical system here is not perfect, nothing is. But it has done a pretty darned good job of looking after my parents, me, and my children, for as long as we've been alive. Cheers, Darren
  11. I'm sorry but I have to express my bewilderment, and disappointment, when I see the amount of misinformation that is being put out there about the Canadian Healthcare System. I find myself frustrated by watching how facts are often distorted, mis-represented, or purposefully left incomplete so as to lead the readers to draw conclusions that aren't necessarily correct. This is not meant as an argument against anyone in particular, but for the sake of adding food for thought, please allow me to play "devil's advocate". For example: What a grossly misleading statement that is stated in such a way as to steer the reader into drawing the conclusion that one would be paying the entire ambulance bill for services rendered. In actual fact, here in BC, the PUBLIC insurance picks up all but $80 of an ambulance ride. That's ANY ambulance ride, be it by air or otherwise. Seems like a pretty good value to me. I know, I'm accident prone. Any private (or extended as we like to call it) insurance would only be required to pick up the additional $80. The statement quoted above is a *major* distortion of the truth, as are so many of the things I am reading about the Canadian, British, and other, healthcare systems. I have no plans on responding to any replies to this post but I urge you to extrapolate the example that I am giving you here and to carefully consider which of the information you are receiving is truly factual and how much of it may be further distortions, exaggerations, or outright propaganda. As a person who's family has made far more use of our healthcare system than I would wish upon anyone, I must confess that it seems incomprehensible to me that anyone would actually be fighting *not* to have such a system. I have absolutely no vested interest whatsoever in whether or not my friends and colleagues in the US have a public healthcare system or not. But from my perspective I find myself unable to understand why, especially with all the talk that there has there been on this board the last year describing many IA member's fears of losing their health insurance, people would actually be fighting NOT to be guaranteed health insurance regardless of whether they can pay for it or not. Where I live, EVERYONE is eligible for the public healthcare plan, regardless or whether or not you can actually pay for it, as low income families are eligible for reduced, or in some cases waived, rates. Oh and by the way, drugs etc become, below certain income thresholds, included as well. A welcome benefit for many lower income families that cannot afford them. More food for thought: This is another interesting quote. I cannot imagine getting any better care than I am already receiving. It is top notch. But I CAN imagine that the doctors would love a privatized system so that they can charge 'market' rates instead of only being able to charge the rates that are set in their collective bargaining with the Government. I've had a LOT of surgeries, as has my son. Neither of us has EVER been in a "ward". The last time I was in a room that wasn't private, was when I was 13. This is not the result of how much you pay, but availability. The hospital closest to my house has mostly private rooms, and some that are called semi private which are shared with one other bed. My personal experience has been that they always give you a private one when they are able to. MY guess would be that regardless of what type of healthcare plan you are on, when they have no private rooms available, you obviously aren't going to be getting one no matter what. As I said previously, this post is meant to be food for thought. As with all political matters, and everything else you read and see in the media, one should not be in the habit of simply taking the information you are given at face value. One must dig deep for the truth in order to make an informed decision. Good luck!
  12. Switch to these: Titanium Power Enduro NIMH AA 2700mAh Rechargeable You'll be glad you did. They outlast the MAHA's and fit perfectly.
  13. Robert, BNC is larger diameter, much heavier, and much stiffer than stranded CAT5. Remember, BNC always has a solid center conductor and some sort of fairly robust dielectric to keep the centre conductor from the shield. John, just checked and this particular reel is made by "Woods" and is called "Cord Caddy 2".
  14. Some large Home Depot-ish hardware store. It came with 30m of A/C extension cord on it. The A/C cable that I stripped off had a much larger diameter so, as a result, I was able to fit 100m of Cat5 on there in its place. It took a bit of thought as to how to best deal with terminating the cable but, believe it or not, simply bonding the inline coupler on and drilling a hole in the reel for the cable to exit has proved be perfectly workable.
  15. 100 Meters of stranded Cat5. No muss, no fuss.
  16. Just curious... What happens within Boom Recorder when there are multiple timecode sources on the inputs? For example, one input contains your production timecode but another is playback timecode that you just want to record on to it's own track.
  17. I couldn't agree more! There's definitely no longer *a* correct way of doing things. There are so many different workflows now. In all but very few cases, it's not our job to choose one, but to give them what they want. That being said, its my feeling that it is also our job to understand what they want, and why they want it. And also to ensure that what they "want" is indeed what they "need", and that it is indeed going to work for whomever requested it and everyone else that will be dealing with our sound files down the line. It would be interesting to compile a list of all of the different workflows that people that are on this forum have used, and what type of projects (film, video, HD, etc) they were used on. For example, I do know that some editors have been requesting 48.048 with t/c at 24. I definitely find myself wondering... has anyone actually recorded this way? Cheers! Darren
  18. That certainly has been the common method of pulling down. But I am currently working on a project that is being shot on film for a film theatrical release. It was requested by editorial that we record at 48.048, which we are doing. Apparently, so I'm told, this workflow is becoming more and more common when editing on the newest Avids at full HD resolutions. Our workflow is to record at 48.048/30. We stamp at 48. Avid plays back the files at 48/29.97. It all seems to work rather well and the telecine process and syncing the dailies in the Avid have gone smoothly. I use Metacorder and Sound Devices recorders. I'm not certain that this workflow is possible with B.R. If anyone knows if it is, please post and let us know as I've had people ask me this but was not able to answer. Best, Darren
  19. If you stamp at 48.048, you need to ensure that the avid being used has the option to ignore the stamp and still play it back at 48 in order to pull it down, and that the assistant editor knows how to accomplish this. I wouldn't make the decision to stamp at 48.048 just because it is the "grown up version", whatever that means.
  20. The newer Avids allow you to do a sample rate conversion of the audio upon import. That being said, if you record at 48.048/30,and stamp at 48k. No sample rate conversion is necessary. The avid will play back the files as if they were recorded at 48 and this will pull them down the necessary amount to match the pull down being done to picture when it is pulled down to 23.976. This pull down will also pull your 30ND T/C to 29.97. Darren
  21. Interesting that only 8 people said they prefer digital mixers, but 20 said they use a Yamaha and 5 said they use a Cameo...
  22. Hi Philip, You do make valid points. But I will mention that I haven't had my wordclock slaved from my timecode for over a year now and there have been no sync issues as a result. Not even on 8ish minute takes, which are as long as I'm likely to experience. This mixer is very much stripped down compared to the Yamaha, and as such if one needs more than 16 channels, or sophisticated clocking abilities, or AES, the Yamaha may be a better choice for you, for now. I believe that for a lot of users, the lack of clocking options would not be an issue, taking into account that I am looking at this mixer as being a good choice for those recording to computers. On another topic, Yamaha recently finally released a new version on their mLan drivers, with the result now being that the computer is no longer required to be the master clock when using mLan. Or, put another way, one can now record directly to the computer from the Yamaha witout the need for an interface. Previously, when using OSX, the computer was forced to be the master clock, which was a highly unreliable method of clocking.
  23. I should also mention that while it does not offer any external clocking at this point, that is not too much of an issue because it does not need to be synced to an interface and, so far, cannot connect digitally to one's recorders. But then, of course, neither can most analog mixers.
  24. Personally, I think that this mixer has a lot going for it. No, it's not an 01v96. But that is part of it's appeal. The Yamaha is an incredible tool with a wonderfully rich feature set. However, there may be many users who don't want or need all of those features, or who find the completely menu driven Yamaha a daunting transition to their first digital mixer. The Studiolive is very intuitive, and I think it may be a very good choice for those that want a digital mixer but do not want or need anything as elaborate as the Yamaha. In addition, it is lighter and draws less power than the Yamaha. There are a few convenience features that it does not have, but it is digital and Presonus have indicated that they are still very open to software changes, so it is entirely possible that these features can still be added in due course. I have been in contact with Presonus for some time now, and am lobbying on our behalf. Presonus also tells me that it is meant for hard road use and has been designed to be very rugged. Of course one thing that remains to be "seen", is how it sounds. My conversations with Presonus are causing me to expect great things. So it will be interesting to see how it turned out.
×
×
  • Create New...