KGraham045

I generally try not to use automix but when I do I generally route all the Wires to one track with automix and have your boom routed post fader on another track.

Lol, I’ve had that happen before too. Thanks everyone

Exactly. I explained all of that and was told.... “We’ll definitely hire a professional next time.“ Oh well...

In hindsight I could have split the file, but originally they claimed I did not give them isolated channels (Which the editor pointed out “was requested”). I originally wanted them to realize they had what they are asking for...and could take a moment to learn before sending out a chain email that I didn’t provide what was requested. And is pretty standard and intuitive in a 2 person interview setup. I told them they could “Use Premiere To Split the file.” and provided a link.

It was an interview with a CEO of a huge company. 10 people on set had IFBs (director/producer/client) and were watching video village. Unless there is a technical issue (or it’s completely unusable) it’s up to the director/producer/client. The audio I provided is 100% professional and represents what happened in the interview and is completely useable in the edit. It was a 3 Camera shoot (2 singles and a wide) I’m just frustrated that they hire and employ an editor who doesn’t know how to properly implement audio and tried to throw me under the bus.

It’s very obvious their editor doesn’t understand how to work with audio and is trying to throw someone under the bus due to their lack post sound knowledge/ post sound abilities.

Yes! That’s exactly it! Here’s part of their original concern.... “The client is asking to remove some specific sounds the interviewer is making while the CEO is talking. Since both tracks appear to be mixed together we can’t fully solve the problem.” “We are in a bit of a time crunch for this, client is high profile and wants to see this done by today eod, tomorrow at the latest.” So my thought is if it’s a “high profile client” and the project is in need of a time crunch. They should offer to pay for work/expertise. Not expect a professional to work on it for free. Or play the blame game to get free work

Just wanting to vent: I have a client who has reached out to me. Here is what their editor is saying/asking: “They are trying to get more audio separation from the CEO and interviewer but we only got one audio track from you and it is stereo instead of two isolated tracks.” I clearly explained that the stereo file I provided was a split mix containing 2 seperate channels “Channel 1 is a different mic and speaker than channel 2. Channel 2 is a different mic and speaker than channel 1” I explained it is a Split mix, and their editor didn’t use the proper audio (Original production sound Audio File) to edit…. I even confirmed this by having them send me an OMF and the orignal production sound file I recorded. (attached is a photo from ProTools) After telling their editor they have isolated channels. And not wanting to do post sound work for free. I got this response back. “We never had this issue before where there was such a bleed, in fact you can clearly hear both of them into each others tracks. Unfortunately this standard is unacceptable for us, we need to work with clear cut tracks with little to no “bleed”.” Here was my response: “I have troubleshooted your issue and provided plenty of explanation. If your unable to work with the files I have provided then my suggestion is to hire a post sound professional who can troubleshoot and address any issues you have.” Out of curiosity would anyone defended their work differently? Or done the post work for free to defend their work?

I don’t use the TRX743 in my bag. As I do use the CL900. But do own 2 TRX743. But I do have a FDP and would use it on the 743 if I used it in my bag. Both the Camera Link and the TRX 743 are 2 of my favorite pieces of Zax gear. I would just rather have another TRX743 in my kit rather than a wide band Camera Link. As the Wideband Camera Link accomplishes very little in terms of functionality and versitility that new products usually offer...

I often go that route as well. As I have a CL900 (actually have 2 at the moment) and 3 RX200s for Hops. So it’s honestly easier for me to go that route than to throw an ERX on camera. My my point is that the CL3 isn’t offering much in terms of versitility/ features that another more cost-effective Zaxcom combo/solution can offer.

The IFB200 would still offer Zaxnet and Mono Audio (although not UHF) plus TC to Camera (with the use of an ERXTCD). But the TRX743 (with Stereo cone) as a UHF Transmitter would then offer Wideband transmission, 2 Track recording and all of the modulations being offered by the CL3 (Mono, Stereo, XR, ZHD) including TC to reciever... The only advantage being that the CL3/CL900 is powered off of BDS. But the advantage of the TRX743 that it can also be used as a Wireless Boom/Talent Transmitter with P48 when a stereo hop isn’t needed. (Also, with a mod from Audio dept. I believe a TRX743 can be powered off BDS.)

I agree with everything you’ve said. My point being about versiltility. That having a Camera Link with the added feature of ZHD transmission doesn’t offer that much of an advantage for the price point. When talking about vestility in my previous statement. I went with the IFB200/TRX743 combo. Reasoning being that the IFB200 offers the same 2 track Recorder and Zaxnet TX that the CL900/CL3 offers. Also the ERX has 3v TC output and the RX200 only has 1.5v TC output... plus the ERX has an adjustable audio level output. And the RX200 offers selectable audio level output.

Don’t get me wrong I love my Camera Link. But to have a $4K Mono Hop system (CL3 and RX200) is pretty steep and not very versatile. When the other Cheaper option would be just to use an IFB200 and ERX to essientally accomplish the same and would still be more versatile...

Kinda bs they don’t want to reblock an older CL900... I don’t see a boh enough advantage to warrant replacing the current camera link if the only features it adds are ZHD modulation which is Mono and Wideband (which would be great but id rather have a TRX743 and IFB200 combo so it’s more versatile.)

That would be amazing

I agree, and completely understand it’s subjective just wandering what others experiences/ thoughts are

I am interested in getting a few DPA wires. I have an all Zaxcom kit so I’m interested in specifically the 4063 Core series. I currently own a bunch of Sanken Cos 11ds and Countryman B6s. I realize that productions don’t seem to care what wires you have as long as you have enough. So I can’t really charge more for them and my main interest in them is for personal satisfaction/experience, but my question is, in others experience how worth it/satisfying is it to get other end Lavs vs industry standard B6 or Cos 11ds? Just curious.

Exactly!

I agree the Zaxcom solution is awesome but quite pricy for when Most Productions just need scratch.

QRX235 is a receiver. The Zaxcom Camera link (TRX900CL) is a Stereo Transmitter/ Zaxnet TX. I have 2 RX200 (Stereo Battery powered reciever is slightly smaller than a QRX235 I guess) and a TRX900CL and it’s an awesome setup.

I have a Rycote WS3 and/ or a Rycote ball Gag.

I’m Looking for a small tripod that I can mount a Sound Devies Mix Pre 6 and a Soundfield SPS200 for ambience gathering. Any suggestions?

I would go with the fastest CPU you can afford... which I believe the faster CPUs are in the larger 27 inch

My fav but not cheap is the Avalon u5. Its Killer

I’m using a 27 inch I Mac 3.8Ghz with 64 GB of Ram. I’m running HD12 with Thunderbolt Native Hub and an Omni/ HDi/o and C24 with a 5.1 system. it was frustrating having to buy a USBC hub for Thunderbolt. But it works Feel free to ask me a specific question.