Jump to content
Chris

Syncing and Linking a SD 788t with a cantar X2

Recommended Posts

Hello

I'm looking forward to get a Sonsax Mixing panell. Now i thinking about a Recorder Back Up Or if the metadata workflow with the Sonosax is difficult and not that easy like with the two mentioned recorders.  I'm thinking to get a Canatr X2 but how can i just press one Recordbutton if i work with Free run Time code. So i want that these both mashines start at the same time but just with one trigger. One Slave and Master. Normaly we work with free run Time code to sync Camera and Sound. I didn't found anything in the web. Of course i could get two Cantars ors two 788. I know. I thought the cantar as main recorder would work very nice with the Sonosax Pre amps. But again missng two Tracks. If you have a full mixing desk with eight channels. Happy to hear your oppinions.

Greetings

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aaton covers this situation in their manual.  They have supplied a circuit drawing that will connect the Cantar X2 Record Tally circuit with the 788T Logic Input (GPIO).  When the Cantar enters record, with the proper settings in 788T menu 93. Keyboard/Logic In: Assign, the 788T will drop in to record at the same time.

Screen_Shot_2015-06-14_at_10.28.19_AM.th

 

I would suggest talking with your Aaton reseller to see if they can make the cable for you.

Edited by Matt Mayer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I run two 788 recorders and have thought about trying to get it down to 1 button as well, but I don't want to slave one machine to the other. I prefer to keep them separate in case of one machine's failure. I generate my TC from a GR-2 and that feeds the two recorders. I believe the 788 can be set to record when it senses TC. I've thought about building a box that sits between the GR-2 and the recorders and turns on and off the TC feed to both recorders. I also run movie late (in log only mode) and if I really went this route, maybe I'd include a feed to the iPad as well. If the Cantar can also be placed in that record mode (record when it senses TC), you could do this setup. You also need an external TC clock to do this. 

I use a Sonosax board as well, but slaving the recorders to each other or triggering them with a shared TC feed, doesn't affect which mixing panel you're using unless you're trying to incorporate the internal recorder on the SX-ST.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sort that i just read your comment's. I didn't get any messages from the forum somebody replaid. And i don't log in every time i go on the site. Sorry for that. Thank you very much for your input. I got the icing panel with the integrated recorder. And i didn't get an cantor a shame i know. But i run a 688 on the cart and i don't like it much. Maybe i go like you Joshua with two 788t or the new sonosax R4+. 

Greetings 

chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't you like the 688? Just curious. I run a 788T (just one) - I haven't run a back-up machine in about 5 or 6 years. I keep a 664 available in my bag rig as a back-up machine in the event of failure. My 788T has not failed me yet. It's a great machine. With a Sonosax on the front, I don't see why you wouldn't be happy with the 688.

I have considered getting a 688 or another 664 for the cart to allow for a higher track count, but haven't really needed it yet. I have found I am always able to clean up a scene without needing to have more than a mix, a boom, and a max of 6 radio mics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the 788 has been a great machine. I still run two of them with the sonosax mixer in front of them. The 788s are small, 8 tracks. I know they are designed to go portable (and I do keep a 3rd in a bag with a 442 ready), but I use them like a recording "box." The one thing that does bug me about the 788 is when I have to redo all of the settings (even after loading my user settings) and reset the inputs/faders one by one. I don't use the faders/gain controls on the 788s - I just use them as two recording boxes. I hope when I move on from the 788, sound devices has another, similar recorder. I don't need the track count of the 970 - nor the weight. I like to run two recorders, fed separately, so if something goes down in one, the other isn't affected. I've had it happen. I've seen it happen. I don't want to spend my political capital on set on machine failure (and what I see as user error if I only run 1 recorder at that point). These recorders are computers and computers fail at some point. So I'm just hoping sound devices has something like the 788 in the next round of machines they're designing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joshua - My 788T has frozen maybe 3 times in 6 or 7 years (not once in several years since giving up using a CF card inside - I use reader as EXT). When it did, I simply said, "I had a machine freeze. We need to go again." It was absolutely no problem. I think under the pressures on set, people probably forget to hit record more often than a machine freezes. Happens to camera all the time, and while they are not usually owner operators, nobody that I can see has suffered more than a frown that is soon forgotten. To each their own, obviously, but given that rental rates have not gone up, and in many cases have gone down, I am not going to have two machines on my cart and one in the bag, unless they are different tools. I can totally see owning 3 machines, just not running two of them redundantly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a machine freezes up mid take, it's easy to do exactly what you are saying. I've had to do the "I'm sorry, sir, I had a user error and just didn't hit record until I noticed about 20 seconds into the take. So even with the 10 second pre-roll buffer, we're missing the opening 10 seconds of that take." Running two machines didn't help with that situation at all. Where it helps is when a drive fails. On some recorders, you record onto the main internal drive and then copy over to a deliverable disk or CF card. If your hard drive corrupts but doesn't alert you. You end up making multiple copies of a bad file without even knowing it. Or if the transfer to the deliverable has issues, and the internal drive fails the next day, you'll have lost possibly your only salvageable copy. These are extreme examples. But I've seen a version of that with another mixer and a whole day's worth of sound was lost. It's one thing to know you have a problem, but when a computer or drive fails, you may not know that there was a problem until the phone call the next day. And then it may be too late. 

Josh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue of back-up recorders is a regular on this site. Back when we ran Nagras, no* one ran a back up recording although many of us carried a second machine on the truck. Now that digital media has proven itself equally reliable (or better) to the Nagra, why should we have the duplication of cost and effort?

I am a believer in a back-up recording partly because it saved me from my own goof on one occasion and partly because evolving technology has made it easy and cost effective.

The goof occurred when I added a microphone at the last moment to capture a line in the back seat of a car in a parking garage. This was before ISO track recording was common or when it was just getting started. I split tracks on the mixer but stupidly forgot to arm the second track on the Sound Devices recorder. It was a great embarrassment as the Director chose to print the first and only take and move on. But I had been running a back-up on a DAT recorder and had the take clean on my second machine so I was able to accommodate his agenda.

The economy and ease of use issue comes from the relatively low cost of simple digital recorders. I've been using a Sound Devices 744 as my back-up machine recording only the mix track(s). Some who run back-ups set up a second machine that can duplicate all of the ISO tracks and fully mirror what is recorded on the primary recorder. I suppose this is a good thing but I regard it as overkill. If the mix track is preserved, that averts the calamity of a lost recording. Not having the individual tracks is a bit of a handicap but the scene can be salvaged. After all, the mix track is all that was available to Post on Giant, Laurence of Arabia, Bonnie and Clyde and many other extraordinary pictures. And, most of the time the loss would only effect one take. But, even if it were a whole day's work, the mix track ought to suffice. A very simple recorder, like a Sound Devices 702T, can serve this function well.

David

*Bruce Bisenz used to run two Nagras just to have a copy for himself in case of a possible dispute. And that came in handy at least once. But Bruce was always an outlier.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow didn'f ment to kick off such a discussion. Acthally i don'g run a back up recorder either. The 688 is a kind of back up. I still record boom also as an iso and do a boom mix and lav mix. And if xou run a stereo set the sonosax is full. And i'm still not used to low lebel isos. So i thought i need that 8 tracks and the two mixtracks on the recorder. I love the combination of the 788t and thd sonosax a lot. But i think the real sence or philosophy of the sonosax SX ST 8 D is that you don'g runan external recorder. I did one project like this cause there werdb't so many actors talking. So i could deal with it just in the mixer. 

About the 688. if you used to a 788t you can see that the 688 is a mixer with that nice function to record alk the tracks. If you want to edit metadata it's not so confi like it is on the 788. and Menu structure digital inputs etc. i hope they do a new 7 series recorder with ten to twelve inputs. I even told sonosax i looking forward fof an upgrade to the mixer recorder to a ten track recorder. Exited. 

I really love that board. 

Greetings 

chris

My 788t was frozen a couple of time too. Even it made a really bad noize. But it was no problem to say sorry cut. Technical issue. And i think that some people don'g press record. To me it happened once. I counted on thd pre roll and just hit thd button on thd slate mark. But already in the situation and scene i didn't press hard enough to start record but i touched ghe rec button. 

Blame on me. But it is already in our blood to press that button so it'actually in our Subconscious. So your finger goes there and touch it but just not strong enough. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×