Constantin

I agreee with fuel generators moving to battery and green power, sure, that‘d be great. But as a director to basically demand to have no cables visible anywhere is ridiculous. It’s a movie set after all

What a weird and random thing to say. But I guess everyone needs their quirk

Also, Schoeps already had a digital preamp a while ago (I think simply called CMD) and discontinued it a shorter while ago. At the time they already said they wanted to develop a completely new digital preamp, but in any case, they surel weren’t starting from scratch. I can’t remember though, if this old digital preamp was AES42. I guess it must have been, because how else would it have been powered? Also, Schoeps already had a digital preamp a while ago (I think simply called CMD) and discontinued it a shorter while ago. At the time they already said they wanted to develop a completely new digital preamp, but in any case, they surel weren’t starting from scratch. I can’t remember though, if this old digital preamp was AES42. I guess it must have been, because how else would it have been powered? I am still unclear though of the advantage this digital body would bring to the movie world, especially if the 2 transmitters only really available compress the signal somewhat. At least I think Zaxcom does this. I find it hard to believe the quality improvement would be significant over analog transmitters, bit who knows. maybe it’s also time Lectro updated their DPR plugon to include AES42

Another advantage to digital mics is longer cable runs without signal degradation, although that is not all that relevant for us here. I found the combination of the Zax 743 with a SuperCMIT to be very noisy, so I am really curious how this will sound with the CMD42. It actually does include a control protocol, too. As Schoeps said, there is an LED to show the mic is on and I seem to remember that this LED on the Neumann digital mics could turn red when recording - but I may be terribly misremembering this. I do have the Neumann DMI-2 which was the control and power interface for Neumann digital mics. With a computer connected you could manipulate all kinds of settings, such as limiter, compressor, name and so on. This could be done live. I don’t know if newer versions of this could achieve any of this without the computer attached. What exactly would the be able to do in mode 2?

Yeah, a new remote control system would have been great. IP57 and removable antenna is certainly a good upgrade, but not worth the extra cost compared to a current SSM - not for me anyway. i have a small pile of SSMs and am very happy with them and have next to no water issues, and I never use the silicone sleeve. I love to find reasons to buy new Lectro gear, but the reasons here are not compelling enough

Oh that is curious. After reading your description I thought it would be the limiter, but now it’s a limiter that never opens anymore. So I‘m not clear yet what happens now. The interview is over and you rebooted your transmitter and everything sounds fine again? Or does this recur?

They would have found a way, but as a US company they are still under the patent restraints, regardless of where they manufacture. In the case with Sound Devices I‘m surprised they can still do this as they purchased Audio Ltd several years ago

That‘s a good thing. Bluetooth audio is always late to the party, too I always prefer actual hardware controls over virtual faders. It’s one of the reasons I even got into this job in the first place. The feel and aura of all the actual hardware of things. That’s why I immediately bought the CL-16, for example. But it’s great to have the iPad option, like in a car to car situation. And I used an ipad on a sailboat, mostly to keep the other gear away from any potential water damage

I too have read reports about MGs long repair times, but I have not heard that the mics need to be repaired more frequently than mics from other manufacturers. I‘m surprised people need such a long time to come up with their own modular mic systems. Schoeps have been doing it for such a long time, and Neumann as well, to an extent, and with such success that I‘m really curious why it’s only catching on now. And by now I mean the last 20 years or so, with Sennheiser and DPA getting into it a while ago, and now others catching up.

As I understand it the converters themselves don’t need dynamic range greater than 24 bits, as they basically shift the reference point around to accommodate louder sounds. So the range stays the same, but the 0dBfs moves around. Still the converters do need to be able to facilitate this I always thought the Cantar did have dual ADCs. But Aaton has never been very open about their specs

While you are making valid points I am curious why you think that 32-bit float of all things would negate the need for mixing?

Speaking into the side of a capsule will never sound good. At least not good as when speaking into the large side of it

You did not get what my problem is from the very post you quoted? Like I said, I detest these posts and photos, hence the negative energy. I just don’t like topics where the sole purpose appears to be to highlight a colleague’s bad work day. Sure, the OP also asked about the mic, but when I asked him to clarify what his post was about, it didn’t really sound like he didn’t know what I meant.

Well, you may find it light hearted, but the person who rigged that mic might not see it that way. His off day rig displayed here among a group of peers. There’s a group on Facebook that has a lot of these posts, and I detest them by now. At first, I shared Olles sentiment about the high end show people making the same mistakes as the low end folks, but by now I find these posts really really boring. anyway, if it makes you feel any better, post away.

What was that experience? well, meet me. I also know a few others who use it…

I‘m uncertain about the purpose of this topic. Is it to enquire about the mic used or it to show that the mic shows? If it’s the latter I fail to see what’s so special about this one. I’m sure most of us here could post hundreds if not thousands of these kinds of mic showings, but to what end?

Same. I actually tend to leave the adapter on the transmitter at all times and always unscrew the MicroDot. So far all good

Here in Germany it’s been ok. Whenever I‘ve had an issue I have gone through local distributor who either repaired things themselves or sent them to Denmark. They replaced a C preamp under warranty and an entire 4017 which had suffered from water damage. So I am quite happy with their support. I just wish they would use more words. On social media there are no reps as far as I know (except for this one guy from Belgium) and when they do repair something (or not) they don’t contact me prior. They just send everything back without further comment.

Hence my advice to take the fur off when possible. A Pianissimo without a fur sounds on par or maybe slightly better than a Cosi - to my ears anyway. Cosi does sound fine and it’s the best solution for indoor and lots of of outdoor situations. But a mic with just the stock foam or naked still sounds better.

Yes, the Cosi is a must-have product, no doubt. However, it still muffles the sound a little bit, so if you’re moving in and out quickly, with potentially szrong wind, I would probably prefer to use a Pianissimo and just take off/put on the fur, as that is really easy and fast to do

Yes, I have and they are legit. Herbert Verdino, the owner, used to post here regularly.

Yes, I am pretty sure they are exactly the same. However, I mostly work with my DPA and here you can literally take the interference tube from the long preamp and screw it onto the short preamp. So they are exactly the same. for a while, I used to go from a super cardioid (like the Schoeps MK41) to a shotgun mic (in my case the Neumann KMR82), because I felt the short tube wouldn’t offer any benefit over the other two. Nowadays, to be honest, I mostly use the 41, even on wides, where I tend to lean heavily on the wires, and where no mic can reach anyway, regardless of length. Getting closer, I‘ll stay on the 41, but I‘ll keep the wires away. I‘ll switch to the 4017 for sonic reasons and sometimes for a slightly more focused sound. Getting rid of noise is rarel a consideration.

Where Hugh Robjohns seems to be wrong though, is the claim that the interference tubes have reduced in size, but that’s mostly not true. In most cases, it’s the preamp segment that has been miniaturised. E.g. the tube on the CMIT and the DPA are exactly the same lengths on the shorter and longer versions. So there’s no reason why they should perform any less well. I don’t know how this works on the short Sanken mics, and others…

So this is actually a cool project you got there, and you found a nice way there to bring tc (or a sync signal) into a camera that doesn’t even have an audio input other than a mic. You didn’t need to build your own box for that, but why not. But I still can’t see the advantage of the GNSS application here. Ok, it may be very precise and it may be easier and cheaper to build than a regular tc box, but in the end it generates a sync signal that all parties involved will record in some way and later it will help with automatic syncing. Cameras and editing software tend to still think in frames so your ultra-precise sync signal will still only end up to be precise down to a frame. It’s a good idea to record the signal at the beginning and at the end of the recording, but that can easily be achieved with regular tc as well. And you’re wasting a audio track, just like when cameras don’t have tc capabilities just like regular tc boxes. The only advantage to your system that I can see is if manufacturers really would integrate it into their hardware. Then it could theoretically all happen automatically, although someone would still need to make sure that all devices have actually received a valid signal. And again, the same would be for any tc box integrated in to a camera. They all now have some sort of remote control feature. Camera makers couldn’t be convinced for the past … I don’t how many years, to integrate proper tc circuits into their cameras, with a few exceptions. So I‘m not sure how you will fare. lastly, the amount of time I spend each day thinking about and actually working on timecode is on average about 45 seconds, including recharging the boxes at night. It may be a bit more for the assistant editor, but all in all the system works pretty well. So how can you improve my day by 45 seconds? I really don’t mean to stifle your enthusiasm, I‘m just genuinely curious what it is you thinl you will bring to the table

In fact everyone who replied answered your question by giving you reasons why it isn’t as simply as you make it sound. You do seem like a noob, though, for finding tc complicates and for thinking that we won’t need to worry about framerates anymore if only we could figure out how to sync our various devices.