Jump to content

Dwindling RF space


tsmyles

Recommended Posts

Hi.

So, I'll be interested to hear what folks have to say about this:

We're loosing our RF space every day, and I guess we'll loose almost all of it by 2009 when the good old FCC makes 1125 lines of Vanna White (digital, for those of you who haven't heard my rant) mandatory.

I'm currently on a show in Van Nuys.  Last October we shot at this location and I was able to find decent space for all 7 of my block 27 and my 2 block 28 Lectros.  Came back this past week and did a scan and, lo and behold, most of the space was GONE.

I called Lectrosonics for help in coordinating the 8 frequencies I needed but found that three of the 8 were almost unusable.  I've finally gotten it down to one bad frequency but this has been one harrowing week.

Personally I can't afford to go out and lay down enough cash to pick up another 7 Lectros in a different block.  And even if I could, I'd have no guarantee that in a year or so these wouldn't be rendered useless also.

What are your thoughts??  How are you all thinking about the problem.  Anyone?? 

Glad I never sold my 6 Vega VHF units.  Those may save my life one day.....

Tony

... never had all this mess on "The Wizard of Oz" and that turned out pretty well.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that the wireless manufacturers had better be working on ways to adapt frequency hopping "listen before talk" technologies to survive in the coming times.  2 years ago I was told that this would never happen, but already one Bluetooth wireless system has been shown (Ricsonix), and I'll bet others aren't far behind.  There has also been talk of getting Congress to set aside some spectrum for wireless mics, but I doubt this will happen: the spectrum is too valuable and the other potential users are all going to use freq-hopping technologies.  Someone will have to figure this out, and they will make a lot of money when all the wireless gear we presently use become paperweights.  I know that Zaxcom has a way around this by turning the TX into a recorder, but I thinbk there will be significant resistance to that concept on all but bigh-end feature shoots.  (It also does nothing for live events, which is a much bigger market for wireless than film/video.

Philip Perkins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

tsmyles,

keep those vhf's. good luck on the untold stories.

maybe lectro can "re-freq". your bl27"s to "something" better for L.A.   Actually, q&a?  can they make vhf freq.agile with the scanning function just like the 411"s?? they still make the 187"s

just as scott said. ch#51 and above will be gone in a few years.

what freqs? or blocks tend to "work" in L.A. for everyone?

good luck to all,

FSBELLA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe we could tell the production companies that wireless no longer

work, we will have to get coverage on everybody with a single camera, (or 2 tight cameras)

ha ha ha.  Tony, were you having No Luck with your 250MW

Transmitters as well?

Coleman

funny like HA HA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Glenn

We will be releasing our new TRX900 wireless with recording in about 60 days. The units are in beta test now with basic transmission. While it is not a cure for live events it does solve the spectrum problem for all scripted and reality production. There are many other advantages to the system over traditional wireless that will become apparent once the system is full release.

Glenn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe we could tell the production companies that wireless no longer

work, we will have to get coverage on everybody with a single cameraColeman

funny like HA HA

Just like the old days...  can you imagine how much the quality of sound would improve immediately if this were done. I have been around long enough (before there were any wireless systems that worked) to clearly remember many directors when blocking out a scene, thinking about coverage, how the sound pickup on the tight coverage can be used in cutting from the wider shot, and even designing the coverage with the DP to accommodate the whole process...  that's all gone now, and as so many of them now say: "what's the problem, I heard them talking".

-  JW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We will be releasing our new TRX900 wireless with recording in about 60 days. The units are in beta test now with basic transmission. While it is not a cure for live events it does solve the spectrum problem for all scripted and reality production. There are many other advantages to the system over traditional wireless that will become apparent once the system is full release.

Glenn

I think that your recording TX is a genius thing, but there are many many film/video situations where the workflow will not accomodate it.  I implore you to use your considerable talent and experience to try and figure out a way to keep our current wireless methods working. 

Philip Perkins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just like the old days...  can you imagine how much the quality of sound would improve immediately if this were done. I have been around long enough (before there were any wireless systems that worked) to clearly remember many directors when blocking out a scene, thinking about coverage, how the sound pickup on the tight coverage can be used in cutting from the wider shot, and even designing the coverage with the DP to accommodate the whole process...  that's all gone now, and as so many of them now say: "what's the problem, I heard them talking".

-  JW

When I started in sound the SF area, only a few of the many sound people working actually owned wirelesses, and they were very flaky and problematic (in an interference free-world!), even though most of them owned Nagras and expensive mics.  The wireless gear just wasn't needed that often, since, as you say, shooting was adjusted to make the scene work for sound as well as picture.  I don't think those days are coming back, and it may be that in the future boom mics will be a sort of specialty thing and not used much, but the transition is going to be kind of rough.  Manufacturers: please get on this. 

So those of us with wireless gear above Ch 27 are hosed....great.

Philip Perkins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reality TV won't be the place for a TX that records. I have a hard enough time getting production to sign off on a HD in the bag (744T, Cantar, etc.). They want it straight to camera.

I think one of the points being made here (and of course Glenn Sanders would like to be the one to provide one solution) is that the traditional wireless "landscape", that arena for which almost all the current RF mic systems were designed to deal with, is rapidly changing and some solution will have to be found. When the situation for RF spectrum worsens, which most predict it will, even the Reality shows may be forced to re-think how those shows are done. The desire may still be high from the producer and others that the audio needs to be "straight to camera" with a wireless link, but if this becomes increasingly difficult to do, some other solution will need to be found. Since the so-called reality shows are so audio dependent, people like you Scott will be expected to come up with some solutions that might require them to change their demands.

Presently, other than the frequency hoping short range Ricsonic Blutooth (beta) product, I don't see any indication that any of the major wireless manufacturers are working on totally new methods for wireless mic systems. This is where a wireless body pack with mic and recording capability could prove to be the ONLY solution in the future if other manufacturers don't have something up their sleeves, and this applies to the Reality shows as well as other sorts of projects.

We all have to stay as informed as possible on all of these issues and the tools we use now, the tools that are going to be available, and be able to make sensible and well thought out approaches to the work. It is of vital importance that we, as professionals in the sound recording community, be the ones who come up with the solutions --- we all know the consequences of a production manager or a bean counter somewhere in an office dictating how the job is to be done and with what equipment.

Regards,  Jeff Wexler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  This is an issue I think we all need to take great interest in. I agree gone are the days when the director would say ok the wide shot is only a geography shot and I will cut it after the third line and we will win it on the close up. It seems like for some reason you have to explain on a multi camera shoot that the close up is only as good as the wide shot. Which is normaly when you get the traditional response "I'm sorry but I have to make my day, so just wire them up" I have not done as much work with the multi track hard drive recorders as most of you guys but with the option of iso tracking a whole scene I think I want my radios to be able to save my butt.

Jeff when you work on a picture like MI3 your ADR budget is probably greater than the entire budget of most pictures we get to work on. Are you expected to have Tom wired at all times? If for no other reason than to get a good guide track. Assuming of course that he will wear it and the scenes wardrobe permits it.

More and more the radio mics are replaceing the boom. Thank god for the likes of the lectro SM as womens clothing gets tighter and tighter. I recently went in to interview for a picture that would be shooting in Canada and Greece. The PM asked me if I had to take my boom man (who has been with me for almost 14 years) with me to Greece. I of course told them the benefits of having someone of his talents on the shoot. The guy who said yah sure what ever got the job.

How do you monitor the sound from the TRX 900? Is this really the way we want to go?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  Jeff when you work on a picture like MI3 your ADR budget is probably greater than the entire budget of most pictures we get to work on. Are you expected to have Tom wired at all times? If for no other reason than to get a good guide track. Assuming of course that he will wear it and the scenes wardrobe permits it.

First of all, Tom Cruise is a total professional and very knowledgeable about the whole process of movie-making. After having done many films with him he also completely trusts my judgement and Don's (my boom operator) --- if the shot requires a wireless mic Tom is totally onboard (and also usually is well aware of WHY it is needed just about the same time Don and I know --- so there is never any of this "oh, do I have to put that thing on" etc., etc.). It is true that the ADR budget is huge on a picture like MI 3 but no one at anytime during the 4 months of production ever used that "againsrt us" (the sound department) and in fact there was surprisingly little ADR on the movie (and no, Tom did NOT have a wireless on for much of the movie).

No one disputes the increasing reliance on wireless (and by wireless I mean mostly to indicate that the primary mic recording the actor is actually ON the actor) that is why we are even dicussing this topic. What upsets me the most is that this trend, reliance on the mic on the actor, is both a symptom AND a cause for the state of production sound recording today (and I personally do not like that one bit).

It is a fact of life that the movie-making process is going to continue to rely heavily on mics on the actors as opposed to "open" boom microphones, the dwindling RF spectrum is going to continue to pose insurmountable problems, and unless solutions are reached soon some other significant change will occur. As I see it, there are only 3 possible areas where advanced technology will be able to help us: One has already happened which is the process of dialog replacement is much easier, faster and less costly (except for talent costs) and this is a route which is taken even on much smaller movies (where there used be very small post budgets). Second would be the development of other methods of recording the sound from a microphone on the actor, and this would be the "recording wireless" (actually ANY viable "actor worn" recorder which at this point would have to be the Zaxcom unit, not even yet released). Thirdly, a total change in the way in which a wireless device interacts with the dwindling RF spectrum --- something on the lines of frequency hoping, dynamic assignment of free channels, listen before talk and so forth. I don't see anyone even hinting at such a product so it must be considered even more vapor than vaporware at this point.

Regards,  Jeff Wexler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I found an answer, ha ha

Laser Beam Audio Communicator

Only: $39.95

Modulated at more than 16kHz for excellent voice audio fidelity

Uses standard pocket laser module for ¼ mile maximum range (included)

Each kit includes one transmitter and one receiver

Includes microphone and digital AGC circuit for full audio range control

Simple 9V battery operation

Now you can talk to your friends over one of the most secure long-distance transmission

types available, a laser beam! Our new laser beam communicator allows you to talk with

pretty good fidelity to your friends up to a ¼ mile away just using a pocket laser pointer.

The transmitter uses a microphone or external audio to modulate a laser beam on and off

at a rate of more than 16kHz so the audio fidelity is much better than that of a telephone.

A telephone is limited to 3kHz, the LBC6K is limited to 6kHz. The receiver includes

filtering to remove the 16kHz carrier and leave behind the high quality audio, and then

boosts the level for use with earphones. To improve the fidelity of the system the

transmitter employs audio AGC on the microphone to boost weak audio, and reduce loud

audio so that the listener never misses a word said! Each kit includes a transmitter and

receiver, and pocket laser pointer. This gives you a complete one-way audio path. If you

need full duplex, or two way, buy two at the special price! Receiver and transmitter are

designed to fit in two pieces of 2" PVC pipe for easy mounting and alignment. Each runs

on a standard 9V battery, DC adapter or AC adapter (not included). Audio output drives a

standard personal stereo headset. Your friends will be amazed when they see you talking

over that red laser beam!

Send Audio Over That Laser Beam!

Disclaimer: To be taken with a good laugh and a grain of salt, Coleman

(I Still can not get a photo pasted here??)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I found an answer, ha ha

Laser Beam Audio Communicator

Only: $39.95

Our new laser beam communicator allows you to talk with pretty good fidelity

I want one! I have been striving to record sound "with pretty good fidelity" my whole career!

quote: (I Still can not get a photo pasted here??)

Click on the drop down "Additional Options" at the bottom of the POSTING box you write in. Then where it says "Attach:" and Choose File, select a file of appropriate size and format, then POST.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

tsmyles,

keep those vhf's. good luck on the untold stories.

maybe lectro can "re-freq". your bl27"s to "something" better for L.A.   Actually, q&a?  can they make vhf freq.agile with the scanning function just like the 411"s?? they still make the 187"s

just as scott said. ch#51 and above will be gone in a few years.

what freqs? or blocks tend to "work" in L.A. for everyone?

good luck to all,

FSBELLA

From Lectrosonics: Refreq'ing costs almost as much as simply buying a new unit.  They told me they have to replace pretty much everything (including the cases, in their opinion because of all the engraving of the block numbers)....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe we could tell the production companies that wireless no longer

work, we will have to get coverage on everybody with a single camera, (or 2 tight cameras)

ha ha ha.  Tony, were you having No Luck with your 250MW

Transmitters as well?

Coleman

funny like HA HA

The 250mw transmitters don't get you around the problem.  Once the receiver sees the pilot signal and opens up it's suseptible to all the normal frequency interference (fundamental/harmonics).

The only other option is to use 250 mw transmitters with receivers with no antennas... don't think I'd want to do that, although in a really close range situation that theoretically would work.... never tried it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I found an answer, ha ha

Laser Beam Audio Communicator

Only: $39.95

Modulated at more than 16kHz for excellent voice audio fidelity

Uses standard pocket laser module for ¼ mile maximum range (included)

Each kit includes one transmitter and one receiver

Includes microphone and digital AGC circuit for full audio range control

Simple 9V battery operation

Now you can talk to your friends over one of the most secure long-distance transmission

types available, a laser beam! Our new laser beam communicator allows you to talk with

pretty good fidelity to your friends up to a ¼ mile away just using a pocket laser pointer.

The transmitter uses a microphone or external audio to modulate a laser beam on and off

at a rate of more than 16kHz so the audio fidelity is much better than that of a telephone.

A telephone is limited to 3kHz, the LBC6K is limited to 6kHz. The receiver includes

filtering to remove the 16kHz carrier and leave behind the high quality audio, and then

boosts the level for use with earphones. To improve the fidelity of the system the

transmitter employs audio AGC on the microphone to boost weak audio, and reduce loud

audio so that the listener never misses a word said! Each kit includes a transmitter and

receiver, and pocket laser pointer. This gives you a complete one-way audio path. If you

need full duplex, or two way, buy two at the special price! Receiver and transmitter are

designed to fit in two pieces of 2" PVC pipe for easy mounting and alignment. Each runs

on a standard 9V battery, DC adapter or AC adapter (not included). Audio output drives a

standard personal stereo headset. Your friends will be amazed when they see you talking

over that red laser beam!

Send Audio Over That Laser Beam!

Disclaimer: To be taken with a good laugh and a grain of salt, Coleman

(I Still can not get a photo pasted here??)

So... if I got one of these and mounted it on my S&W 686 could I shoot....er...um......ahem...... kill two birds with one stone?

I still like the idea someone ventured nearly 25 years ago where actors would simply be implanted with some kind of device that would just automatically record their dialogue, or some sort of gold paint that would line their mouths and then as they talked the capacity of the mouth would change and this would be converted into electrical signals, along the lines of how a condenser mic diaphragm works.  He was kidding.  I sorely wish he wasn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff you mentioned the Bluetooth product in a beta stage at the moment.

Ive followed a few discussions on bluetooth audio technology and apparantly the transmission speeds just cant match the quality of sound needed for production standards at the moment.

But does anyone foresee Bluetooth becoming a viable method of wireless in the near future? Surely transmission speeds will increase and one day we'll have a truly digital wireless system that isnt at the mercy of whats been left over by the big bad com towers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff you mentioned the Bluetooth product in a beta stage at the moment.

Ive followed a few discussions on bluetooth audio technology and apparantly the transmission speeds just cant match the quality of sound needed for production standards at the moment.

But does anyone foresee Bluetooth becoming a viable method of wireless in the near future? Surely transmission speeds will increase and one day we'll have a truly digital wireless system that isnt at the mercy of whats been left over by the big bad com towers?

Check the RicSonix Bluetooth wireless shown @ the last NAB.

Philip Perkins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy, uh, cow!

http://www.gracedistribution.com/blue/Ricsonix%20Blue%20flyer.pdf - Im sure you guys have seen it already, but if anyone hasnt heres to minimizing the search.

Jeff, Philip - what are your thoughts on this system? Did you guys check it out at NAB?

It seems kind of toy-ish, but if it works like they say, thats a serious serious step forward, right?

Is 16bit/48khz a high enough transmission quality link?

Sorry for all the questions, but surely here is a system that could be the new wave of wireless?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy, uh, cow!

http://www.gracedistribution.com/blue/Ricsonix%20Blue%20flyer.pdf - Im sure you guys have seen it already, but if anyone hasnt heres to minimizing the search.

Jeff, Philip - what are your thoughts on this system? Did you guys check it out at NAB?

It seems kind of toy-ish, but if it works like they say, thats a serious serious step forward, right?

Is 16bit/48khz a high enough transmission quality link?

Sorry for all the questions, but surely here is a system that could be the new wave of wireless?

bluetooth you are limited with range (30-50ft). it i should be good when range is not a issue.

fsbella

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I asked Rick from Ricsonix about the range of his device, and when/if it could be made greater, and he indicated that it was a question of not wanting his TX to be bigger to accomodate a bigger battery.  I encouraged him to think about making something w/ longer range even if if it was significantly bigger, it might be worth it.

Philip Perkins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have been reading this thread with great interest, more for the  sake of wo camera shooting wide and tight shooting simultaneously than the disappearing RF space. I would be happy to say that the wires don't work we better plan coverage with a boom in mind. Two cameras is what has taken the fun out of my job as a mixer. I remember stategically using plant mics, booms and the occaisonal wire for what I felt was nice matching perspective knowing that in coverage I would get all of the dialogue on a boom and that a good editor could easily replace clean coverage into a master. I still argue all the time for two-medium shots or two wide, but never wide and tight, I often have good luck and will fight for it because I can remember the days when a wireless meant automatically that  ADR would be needed because they were so inconsistent.With in home sound systems being so much better and theatres with really good sound you would think that Producers and the other crafts would care more for a great sound track that preserves the hard work of the actors and does justice to their performances. I could really start to rant now but will stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't care how the manufacturers get there, where it's Bluetooth or White Fang or whatever.  The new deal is going to be smart frequency hopping and listen before talk, unless enough companies w/ political mojo can get the FCC to fence off a chunk of spectrum for radio mics to use.  This seems very unikely.  The Ricsonix Bluetooth wireless may end up just being a curiosity, but I'm hoping that it is just the first of many products to find ways to use technology that is compatible with eveything else that is in the air now.

Philip Perkins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...