Jump to content
afewmoreyears

DUGAN for the 633!! Firmware update 4.50!!

Recommended Posts

I wonder if Zaxcom could implement Dugan licenses onto the nomad.  They would be very smart to do so,  it has my sniffing my whiskers at the SD. This coming from a very very big fan of zaxcom all my wireless and recorders are zax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Prahlad Strickland said:

I wonder if Zaxcom could implement Dugan licenses onto the nomad.  They would be very smart to do so,  it has my sniffing my whiskers at the SD. This coming from a very very big fan of zaxcom all my wireless and recorders are zax.

You're not alone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Prahlad Strickland said:

I wonder if Zaxcom could implement Dugan licenses onto the nomad.  They would be very smart to do so,  it has my sniffing my whiskers at the SD. This coming from a very very big fan of zaxcom all my wireless and recorders are zax.

You could always do what I did. Get a 633 and use it with 2 QRX's and a QRX235 w/IFB. That way i get a boom and 5 channels of wireless in a small bag with tactile faders. The QRX235 w/IFB sends audio and Timecode to my ERX's and I use serial cables between the QRX's so i can control transmitter gain and frequency from the QRX's.  It's pretty good. 

I tried to get along with the Maxx, but just didn't bond with it. Still love my Nomad for bigger bag days and cart gigs and would welcome a better automixer. The Nomad is still my favorite recorder, but I think the 633 with Zax wireless is gonna be my new go to for bag days.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jason Todd said:

You could always do what I did. Get a 633 and use it with 2 QRX's and a QRX235 w/IFB. That way i get a boom and 5 channels of wireless in a small bag with tactile faders. The QRX235 w/IFB sends audio and Timecode to my ERX's and I use serial cables between the QRX's so i can control transmitter gain and frequency from the QRX's.  It's pretty good. 

I tried to get along with the Maxx, but just didn't bond with it. Still love my Nomad for bigger bag days and cart gigs and would welcome a better automixer. The Nomad is still my favorite recorder, but I think the 633 with Zax wireless is gonna be my new go to for bag days.

 

You are right.

Maxx is a great idea but poor implementation...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally. I still own a Maxx, I just wish it had been a little more well thought out. Still love my Nomad and excited to check out the Deva 24 when it comes out. I miss Neverclip and phase invert on every channel when working with the 633, but other than that, it's pretty great.

It's not exactly a Rado OneUnit, but it's light and tight. I'm not as adventurous as Rado is with modifying gear

IMG_1349.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Jason Todd said:

Totally. I still own a Maxx, I just wish it had been a little more well thought out. Still love my Nomad and excited to check out the Deva 24 when it comes out. I miss Neverclip and phase invert on every channel when working with the 633, but other than that, it's pretty great.

It's not exactly a Rado OneUnit, but it's light and tight. I'm not as adventurous as Rado is with modifying gear

IMG_1349.JPG

Sweet! I like the Tetris perfection. Just curious, if you are to use Nomad, do you ever end up having to pull your whole bag apart?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Jason Todd said:

Totally. I still own a Maxx, I just wish it had been a little more well thought out. Still love my Nomad and excited to check out the Deva 24 when it comes out. I miss Neverclip and phase invert on every channel when working with the 633, but other than that, it's pretty great.

It's not exactly a Rado OneUnit, but it's light and tight. I'm not as adventurous as Rado is with modifying gear

IMG_1349.JPG

Looks great.

wish it had more aes3 inputs.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's definitely a bit of work to take apart. I have a Nomad, micplexer 2, and two QRX's ready to go in another bag and I plan on adding another QRX200 to the Nomad bag this year. Either that or sell the two QRX200's and micplexer and get an Rx12. The RX12 is pretty heavy, so I wouldn't bag it often, but it would make it super quick to change from nomad in a bag to Nomad on a cart. Since I run my wireless AES in my Nomad bag it would be one audio cable and a few serial cables to switch between bag and cart. Still deciding.

As it stands now, I already have power cables and audio cables set up for two additional QRX's in my Nomad bag. So all Inhave to do is pull the QRX100's from my 633 bag and put them in my Nomad bag since I have separate cable setups in each bag. They're all held together with dual lock so it's not too bad moving them around, but I wouldn't wanna have to do it in a hurry.

 

I'm with you, Rado. I prefer going AES and it really saves weight on cabling. Even still, this bag is between 7 and 8 lbs. I only have a bathroom scale, so can't get too precise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, first reaction, i can understand is; wow great, new toy, new option, easier to work. Easier for ME, less worry.

Thats great. Fun, yay.

 

Im about to heavy the thread up here, and, i realize that.

My heavy two cents...

 

*long game*

 

One could say; mark this date in you calendars gentleman.

This release brings many of us/you, whom are working in "factual" television, also known as "reality" or "docuseries" or other.

Which by the way, is a VERY large segment of the average market working "soundmixer/recordist" these past 15+ years,

This bring us/you one VERY big step closer to being a SOUND PA, and also being paid commensurate as one.

 

Enjoy it while you can.

In the near future, when you feel like complaining about how cam dept and production companies are buying this machine and having *someone* operate it for 150$ day, and wondering why you are working less, I hope you remember you asked for it. And hope you know where to point your finger.

 

 Some deeper consideration and thought regarding this release could perhaps be put towards considering offering this as available exclusively to "registered" (whatever that means) or "wireless license holders".

Or some other idea along those lines.

Not stock. A hurdle to the ease of acquiring this should seriously be considered for the good of the trade.

 

Again, just my heavy two cents.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My light two cents..

 

If you think buying a machine with this option available turns us into Sound PAs or will reduce our pay rate to $150 a day...your wrong... 

   Reality TV, with all the hustle (and I mean hustle), wireless mics and a lot of them, wireless coordination, Big bag rigs, lots of gear to understand the operation of, boom mics, their placement, choosing and their use... Time code and it's use, Coms and sends... Media and it's proper use, storage and transfer, the list goes on and on...  

It take years in many cases to have a clear understanding of all that go into being a sound person for Motion Pictures of any type.. With 1466 posts you should know this.

 

And..

I don't think there is a camera person in the world that want's to deal with some of the crap we deal with...

 

  This tool helps the guys and gals in the field end up with a sometimes better mix track(s) than it was possible before with less hassle doing so. The rest remains the same as well as all that goes into a days work. I really don't think this addition to our tool shed is making it easier for anybody to be simply replaced by a PA..  or turning us into SOUND PAs because we can auto mix a mix track with 7 people doing improv.

If this helps those in post with a better track to work with, and makes it easier to accomplish in the field for us, win win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, afewmoreyears said:

I don't think there is a camera person in the world that want's to deal with some of the crap we deal with...

There are already shows that have no sound crew. Just camera guys using ZFRs on talent. Granted they are usually disasters because the camera guys don't know how to lav, and can't monitor anything. But it is another step closer. 

I agree that having an FCC license or something should be a prerequisite for the Dugan, and it should not be available to production companies (eh hem VER). Wish all that were possible but in the end, it's up to us to make ourselves more valuable than the machine that we use, and saying no to gigs that want to provide the gear.

Our species has already done a pretty good job of making ourselves obsolete in regards to usefulness. Just remember that when you're on the job. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with AFMY.

Anyone who can be replaced by a piece of gear is not an accomplished professional sound mixer.  They should be more concerned about being replaced by someone who is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why it should be the auto mixer that will replace us. If anything, it'll replace a post position, because now the mixes may sound good already, whereas on many reality gigs, juggling 5/6/7+ wireless and the boom, mixing was nearly impossible.
So an automixer (and they existed before Dugan was brought to the 633), makes something possible that wasn't possible before.
I won't hurt us, it'll help us (I mean bag-based work).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with AFMY as well but it's way more than just gear or even technical expertise. Nearly every gig I'm on I hear the same thing, "You're much nicer than the other sound guys we've worked with." I see it on this board too with certain members. Wish people a happy holiday and get no response, but say something negative about someones favorite piece of gear and you'll get plenty of grumpy replies. The attitudes often diminish your expertise and having a positive attitude during 60 hour work weeks goes a long way. So lighten up a little. One thing I learned from booming is you get way better results by being nice to cast and crew than by arguing. Great sound comes equally from working well with others as the gear itself. Machines or software can't replace the personal touch and human elements.

To say that the Dugan addition to the 633 will lead to "Sound PA's" is ridiculous. Though it does help former boom op's like me do a better mix and advance my career as a department head. Thanks SD!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder whats Next?

I think we can expect a 633 v2 with a 4ch superslot rig. Or maybe a hardware update on our current 633's to allow connection of the new superslot box. 

Anyone else thinking the same thing? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  I expected the reactionary; No it wont!

An open mind will observe that there is a certain amount of denial there. There are and will be MANY, situations where what I relate will come to pass.

 

Here is a more precise example to visualise.

 

Situ: largish "factual" show that used to necessitate 3-5 "sound mixers", (along with a sound supervisor of course) running, gunning, following around and mixing. The work of mixing. This will absolutely facilitate the hiring of what i labled "soundPA's" over what used to fill a percentage of my calendar. Absolutely. Its clear as day.

 

There will always be the sound supervisor, yes, there HAS to be because indeed, it is complicated. But soon, sooner than anyone will like,

Those 3-5 mixers at 600/day will be going going gone.

Honestly, dont shoot the messenger ok?

And shooting holes in the message wont help either.

 

And, an even WORSE byproduct, will be the influx, of the lets call them

"sound machine operating PAs'", credits will be in their cv, their availability to production will increase,

 The professional sound person, as a respected trade, will as a result, in my opinion, diminish some. And lets be honest, its a trade that historically, on the whole, has had its difficulties crystallizing that respect.

On the whole.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for not accepting your viewpoint and using the word ridiculous in my last post. I just see the sound department as such an important entity in the media creation process. You're probably right that the days of 4 or 5 mixers making $600 a day are history. But I do know that great PA's deserve a decent wage as they're like gold on a set. Technology can never replace a sound person who cares about the production and the quality of sound in the end product.

We are the ears of the set and know things that nobody else does. We have the opportunity, if we choose, to make many things better on set with the things we hear. We hear the uptight crew members and can help smooth things over before they come to a boil. We hear the stress of the talent when a Director gets frustrated and barks at them. On boom I often use compassion or an encouraging word at these times and it seems to help keep them focused on their delivery. We have the power to fix things before they become real issues and I see that as part of my role too. These comments are only to emphasize that technology cannot replace the often unseen benefits we can bring to any production.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A sound supervisor is not going to mic 15 people, and deal with all that has been explained... Qualified humans will be needed to mic, and maintain all that is going on... not one person... Who is going to run all the bags, carry them, set them up and use them?  Your Sound PAs?

 

As usual, as a whole, REALLY only us as a craft can stop any nonsense moving in this direction, ( history not good I will admit) but in the end, it will be poor results from such a "plan" that will ultimately doom any foolhardy ideas for such a direction in Reality Sound.  Any "Supervisors" should refuse and scoff at any suggestion to do anything like this.. for their ultimate job and it's security and the craft as a whole... And,  because it will yield poor at best results first and foremost. An auto mixer for a mix track has little to do with any of this.

In the end it's a dumb idea... 

 

On many crews there a LOT of working staff... we, at only a few people, and important people, are not their key financial worry for the amount of bang for the buck we provide... There are 20 other things that financially are more worrisome for the Above the line folks to deal with... Good sound to those who know in Production is well worth our fees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that people are forgetting that even if you're the best and the nicest, your job comes across some bean counters desk and that's the chopping block. 

How many times does some producer tell you the sound budget for a project and it is completely inadequate? I remember a job where they had enough money for me and a basic kit. But I actually also needed two boom ops! Not in the budget. What happened to that show? Never came out. Wires weren't the answer and I couldn't save it on my own. That producer got hired on the next one because she came in under budget. Even though it cost the outcome of the show. But to them, that's my fault. Even though I told them what was needed. Even put it in my report. But I was the one who was blamed and not called back. 

It always comes down to money. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JonG said:

I think that people are forgetting that even if you're the best and the nicest, your job comes across some bean counters desk and that's the chopping block. 

How many times does some producer tell you the sound budget for a project and it is completely inadequate? I remember a job where they had enough money for me and a basic kit. But I actually also needed two boom ops! Not in the budget. What happened to that show? Never came out. Wires weren't the answer and I couldn't save it on my own. That producer got hired on the next one because she came in under budget. Even though it cost the outcome of the show. But to them, that's my fault. Even though I told them what was needed. Even put it in my report. But I was the one who was blamed and not called back. 

It always comes down to money. 

No, NOT always Jon, many know the importance of quality sound and are happy to pay... I work for many of them..  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Similar to AFMY, I don't see this replacing people on sets anytime soon. One day, who knows, but for right now it is just an other quality tool for me to use from time to time. My feeling has always been that the human element has always been the best tool that I can offer, and I try to value the people that I work with and have meet over the years.   To quote the Old 97's " Jobs are all jobs and sometimes they suck, I love what I do and I have had some pretty good luck" Value people and embrace change, it is a pretty good way to spend a career. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I lived through the rise of both "video techs" and "super-editors".   When video got portable enough to become a popular production medium for real jobs but wasn't portable enough yet to have all the technology within the camera, a new and very powerful category of crew person, the "video tech" or "technical director--TD" was enshrined as boss of all things video.  In a great many cases they began doing the audio recording as well--handling both camera-tweaks and sound.  This cost me a lot of work, and I even briefly considered trying to become a video tech myself in order to keep the clients that had cut me, a sound-only dude, loose.  So what happened?  Technology changed, DPs got back up on their hind legs and today the "video tech" is gone, except for really large multicam jobs.  And I'm still working.  On to the "super-editor":  in the late '90s there arose a multi-tasking sort of megalomaniac editor who claimed all post work on a project as their own, and sold themselves that way.  Edit, color, VFX, animation, graphics, AND audio--they did it all.  And then post got a lot more complex, and the demands for visuals etc got much greater.  What was the first task they had to drop to make their deadlines?  Audio post.  And so I was back, again.  My point: I've lived through a lot of technology changes, and come out of each one in a better position than I was in before, in spite of always having a short period of thinking "here it comes--this is the comet that kills the dinosaurs!".   A last thought: when wireless mics got a lot better (like in the '90s) there was this kind of talk as well.  Ditto re the advent of synths and samplers in music recording.  Have some respect for yourselves, people!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, afewmoreyears said:

No, NOT always Jon, many know the importance of quality sound and are happy to pay... I work for many of them..  

I don't think anyone here is saying all or nothing, black or white, yes or no. No need to get defensive about your opinions. We all have loyal clients that understand the importance of who we are and what we do. No one is debating that. But I do see the advent of a "sound pa" for some jobs, and 4-6 $600/day mixers turning into a single sup and a number of eager "sound pa's" willing to bust their buns for a low rate in order to further themselves. Why not? How many people here got their start doing craigslist gigs, giving away a ton of gear and working for peanuts? Probably a pretty large number. Why? Because they didn't know any better, and they had bills to pay. There are already plenty of sounds sups out there that hire legions of young ignorant types, sending them out on jobs with their gear, taking the rental and skimming their rates. It is not unheard of, and it can easily get worse. Not black or white, not 0 or 100, all or nothing. Just something else chipping away at the stone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, JonG said:

... No need to get defensive about your opinions. ...

Please, Jon, such posturing is not needed here.  I never read any defensiveness into AFMY's comments, just his opinion based on many years of experience.

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


×