Jonathan Michael Lau

​I understand and respect where you're coming from. However, I don't use the term "favor" as in something that one department would be indebted to another for. In the context of which I refer to it, asking camera to make a change that is unnecessary wouldn't be a reasonable accommodation. It wouldn't be the difference between bad sound, and that's why it would be a "favor." As such, there's a limit to how many favors people will cater to before it hinders their job as well, or at least annoys them and negatively affects your relationship to work well together with them. Just to be clear, I dont think we disagree about the fundamentals.

I've come upon a few situations where I've had difficulty working with a boom op (not a norm for my bag work, and in a non-cart situation). My question would have to be: If the boom op believes he doesn't have the space to properly boom, whether it be because of shadows or an object in the way, and yet as the mixer observing the set and the frame lines, you believe and know the boom op has the space to get in closer, should the boom op still be deferring to the mixer to make the final decision? Is it still the boom op's "responsibility" to do his job and get good sound in his/her opinion, even if he's overriding the mixer? Based on set protocol, I've always believed the boom op should trust the mixer and defer to their judgment, or have a proper discussion to explain each one's concern rather than object to it outright and start speaking to camera dept to resolve the issues. While talking to camera dept. is necessary, there are times when it simply isn't. You only get so many favors. And this is when the mixer is directly involved, not delegating responsibilities to the boom op. If it's in front of cast and crew and not clear cut, I always prefer a pow wow off set. Am I missing something here?

Login on tapatalk and android 5.0, no problem. post as well. Thanks Jeff!

Fixed your statement for ya! I think it's important to note that a mix, either LR or a mono mix, has different applications for different worlds of what mixers do. As such, accompanying them are different expectations and uses. Of course, I'm as fresh in the game as you but for any one-man-band shoot, the only mix you'd probably ever be asked to do would be either an LR mix (Boom/Lav) or a reference mix (a tracking mono mix of your choosing). ISO's would just be tracked to normal levels. A mono mix wouldn't be expected for any omb unless they weren't holding a boompole (eg. a sit down interview or all lavs & no boom). After all, proper booming should be a two-hand operation. And we only have two hands. or at least, most of us.

1) you act like a rental house. When they (production) rent your gear, you charge them a separate invoice and get insurance for the kit items they rent out from you. This is usually negotiated separately from your labor rate as a mixer/employee or contractor and therefore, shouldn't be considered one and the same. The mixer filling in and operating the gig with the small kit would have their own deal memo, but the business transaction and rental terms are still with you (kit owner/business/rental house) and the production company. (Think camera rentals from a rental house or student gear rent from the school equipment room). I think it's possible to be the one hiring but that complicates things and isn't how it should be done. So you don't hire your friend, you refer them to fill in for you, and production hires them. 2) following 1, the equipment rented is covered by the insurance. In your terms, it shouldn't matter who is operating(which is why it should be separately worked out). Production, as the employer, has the responsibility to provide equipment insurance and workers comp or whatever other insurance policies they may wish to have to protect their workers. It shouldn't be on you, unless you decide to be the employer (which, you normally shouldn't be doing save for certain exceptions). Tl;Dr version: your friend takes gig, uses your gear, production is responsible to provide all insurances (if everything was done properly) Just be careful as some shoots will try to change the terms of either the deal memo or the insurance policy (eg. Owner - operator will NOT be covered in insurance for damages, meaning the owner can't be the operator of the covered gear on set, as you'll see on some student school-provided insurances)

just be careful with the 'get a pa/grip' to do it. Skill is important in booming, possibly much more so than your mixing. unfortunately, you may need to boom while you track sound simply because they can always remix in post. They can't reboom a poorly handled or placed boom mic. Like all things, you learn techniques and better stances to deal with overhead booming by practice, but a lot of shots don't need the "h" stance so it's more about stamina and skill than just muscles. I'd do some booming, even if it's just to understand what you'd want or need from someone who booms for you

Sound houses pro-sound.com gothamsound.com call or email ahead if you need something. They dont always have everything in stock in-house and may need to ship it from their warehouse. If you're also looking for non sound gear, there are other places.

Ive worked with a few ny female mixers. Honestly, most of them are super on-point so there isn't a question of being taken seriously, although you can bet there'll always be someone you mic with a stupid, offensive comment. It goes both ways. People tend to care more about skill and likability. If you lack either, no one will take you seriously. that's pretty universal. And I feel we're geeky about the same things on both sides of the aisle so i'd guess the perception is about the same. As for laving, we should always accommodate where we can. Less experienced talent tend to be more skiddish about privacy, but really, that's normal. it's always 50/50. Comfort is preferable, but only so far as it doesn't interfere with the quality of your work. Good sound is the job first and foremost. Everyone eventually comes to realize it doesn't matter who does it, as long as it's respectful.

i've tried hogs hair in a downpour on a night shoot and it held up well to keep out water. my only issue with it is it's super messy (sheds like a tree) and i wouldn't want to use it more than once. i've also considered a rainman or rycote duck but then i bought some air conditioner foam at a home depot by chance when i was searching for hogs hair; funny thing is, it's been doing the trick. i haven't tested it in an hour-long sink rinse but i've run it through a bath faucet for a few minutes and it seems to repel water completely. the valleys help direct any water that pools up towards the front edge. i have used it on two ext. rain shoots with decent rain and it held up well. But obviously, it's something I jimmy rigged with a truckers hitch using rope and haven't really worked on. I clipped the back side closed where i'm using the super softie and it kept water from dripping down the back as long as i was aware of the open sides. Transparency-wise, i can't speak for it as i only really ever use like a hat (literally) and don't cover the entire mics on the bottom. wind-protection, probably not but i haven't tested. softens rain drops a bit. It comes in a pack of approx 2 18"x9" insulating inserts for like $15 and you can cut them or rig them however you want, easily covering wherever is vulnerable. Maybe add more to the sides, a back extension, or just simple velcro attachments. or cut an outward funnel to direct dripping water away from the center of the front of a blimp. My focus has just been a cheap, quick rain solution as i've only ever had one serious rain-heavy exterior in the forest. Perhaps the most important factor for me is transportation as i have to commute around the city with two bags on a bus and train. the foam folds up and squishes well without damaging it's shape or effectiveness. If water protection for super cheap is the biggest concern, this is certainly something to play around with. definitely need to try this!

cheap thing I grabbed for a nite ext http://www.microcenter.com/product/309954/Flexible_USB_LED_Light

since my bag is typically always mobile commuting around the city, I've had to leave my inner pockets for safe storage while the outer ones hold my receivers. The risk of having things fall out while being transported is the only reason I opted to do this. So for the battery, I also have kept it in the inner sleeves. I wanted to keep everything solidly where they are except for my tx so those are the only things outside that freely move around. I've found with the np cup on the top, it's easier to switch. The cup falling off is only an issue if there's nothing supporting beneath. A spare np flat or my mic case is perfect to safely elevate it. And nothing really moves when I'm recording, even if I'm walking so a kickoff isn't any concern. Side access normally would be great but because the pockets are full of cable accessories and wires at the bottom are routed outside, it's actually a bit clunky to unzip down far enough vs going from top which is unobstructed once I pull out all my stored tx. I realize there must be a better way to pack the batteries but it takes a little tweaking. Kinda like an nyc apartment, real estate is at a premium.

take numbers reset was definitely needed. the original was half a step up from the lack of file naming on smaller recorders. made organizing possible, but was clunky enough that one couldn't distinguish takes. Not to mention, the root folder on the card was always called "music," which speaks to the 680's target consumers ;] automatic on/off recording function based on input levels seems like a pleasant addition as well doesn't seem like they added any official support for power connections to np-1/external batteries and instead opted to "improve" their internal AA efficiency. For this and other features, my guess is they're still trying to reserve more practical location-intensive features for their Pro film HS series, coupled with the fact the development teams may be different (if i recall correctly from memory). But am I the only one shocked by this?: "distortion-proof dual recording" is probably the most welcome of the improvements simply because clipping distortion on the 680 was absolutely harsh (though, well within expectation of the product's class). But if it avoids limiting/clipping, it's a close comparison to Neverclip, albeit without the extra bells and whistles. No mention of dual a/d as it appears to just source one input? which explains why you'd lose half your effective individual inputs. though i can't speak to how they technically are doing it (recording at -12dB of whatever you set trim as,which becomes your safety, and using the +12dB as the main track levels?) The DR line is definitely still an amazing budget tool if it keeps in the same price range as it's former version. iso tracks alone for me were initially the most appealing for the price but isn't the 680-2 dual recording a big deal? +1 the "sync in" as Tascam calls it in their specs doesnt refer to syncing sound and picture or smpte timecode. It refers to their ability to gang more than one dr-680 unit to one another eg. using one unit as master, another as slave, and controlling both units at the same time using the master buttons. that's a very, very different function.

Hey guys, first post. Jonathan Lau from New York. If you'll excuse me, a proper introduction is in order later. but if I may point out with respect As someone new to this group myself, there hasn't been any reason for me to pose a question that I have not found the answer to somewhere on these forums. Yet, I would beg to differ that people don't ask questions they couldn't have answered themselves or by reading the manual. Whether or not Senator is posting, it happens throughout the year irregardless. +1 all Spot on. I think one of the reasons has to do with a hope to facilitate more meaningful topics of discussion that hadn't been touched before. The other is that his responses often reveal a lack of discipline that people need to learn. All that Marc said or even just talking to a fellow mixer you know personally, these are essential skills of the craft. They educate with accredited hard sources. It builds relationships that you should have and trust. There is a method to his madness. And I feel the Senator is more of a devils advocate in those instances. An important voice that discussions of any merit should have. He really tries to focus topics, albeit often bluntly. But it really is important. I had a professor whom i greatly respected because she put a huge emphasis on language and intent. Good communication skills, proper terminology, all of that is necessary when dealing with technical concepts that are often ambiguous and sometimes interchangeable where they shouldn't be. She would always point out improperly used words and encourage students to both be concise and clear to convey a thought. Say what you mean, mean what you say. It says a lot about who you are and how serious you are about what you do. It communicates to others a genuine investment in the industry and a respect for the people you're seeking answers from. This isn't a face to face or a phone call. it's a different medium and form of communication. Not to mention, mixers in general have enough pressure to be competent and perfect in what we do as the nature of the job requires. If we don't know how to properly troubleshoot issues, it sends the wrong message. And often than not, that can be depriving yourself of a huge part of the learning process. It's hard enough trying to take what people say as verified facts without having to worry about them also contributing to the misinformation/confusion that is Sound. Otherwise im just getting more confused or learning something that is misconstrued. That's the biggest caution one has to take away when doing a "google jwsound." But also why those discussions already happened. +1 CrewC. Couldn't have put it better myself Best, Lau