Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I recently discovered the CEDAR DNS2 which has been around since 2016. Like many of you I have encountered a lot of noisy environments, often caused by construction sites, public transportation trains, and of course our dearly beloved generators. One time I had to work at a house that had a very noisy air vent that neither the owner or I could ever figure how to shut down. My one solution was to use a pillow to block the noise, since I did not have sound blankets. Needless to say the pillow was thick enough to make it into a low hum. Though I have not had the chance to work with the CEDAR DNS2, nor do I know of anyone that has one besides my local rental house, brings me to ask a few questions for those of that do or do not have one:

 

1. Have seen some major improvements in your workflow?

2. Do clients ever ask for one, or is it our own kept secret?

3. Is there still post sound design work that needs to be done, despite the fact that your able to cancel out a good amount of noise

4. If you're connecting a shotgun mic, on to this devise can you use a HPF, like you can with some audio recorders

5. Whether you're a Zoom, Sound Devices or Zaxcom user it doesn't matter to me. I would just love to see what your rig looks like and how to set it up on your audio recorder mixer.

6. Besides price and maybe not working on live, reality TV or sporting events, what would be a good reason to not purchase one? 

 

Thanks in advance for all your comments!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most people I know who use one will route either their mix or just the boom into the DNS 2 and then record the output from that on a spare track. Most will always keep the unprocessed signal. This is important as post will not want you to process your tracks in such a way. 

 

The reasoning usually is they want to demonstrate to the director on set what can be achieved in post and that they should either not worry or they should worry. 

Plus, they want to help the director hear the dialog better on set as well as in the editing room. 

 

Personally, I think it’s a somewhat dangerous tool in that it can create the impression that a noise on set is not a problem, because the mixer filtered it on the spot. But what if they used too much of the DNS? Maybe affecting the dialog too much without noticing (they are in a noisy environment after all) and thinking that this noise isn’t a problem when actually it is. 

It can also degrade our ability to fight noise the old fashioned way. By getting rid of the noise itself. We will never get the generator parked further away once they hear it removed with the Cedar. No one will bother to nicely ask the lawnmower guy to stop mowing while we‘re shooting, and so on...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have demo'd one on a movie for a couple of problem scenes in an alleyway with extractors that could not be turned off.

It worked extremely well and provided either an alternative mix track or alternative boom track as it is a 2 channel device.

I am now going to use it on a movie. A movie can go through many months of editorial and screenings before Sound Post gets to work on it so it gives Editorial an option to use the DNS mix track in the edit to see a scene play better and allow temp music and the like to work better.

 

The politics are interesting as Constantin alluded to and i will not be advertising that i have the DNS to the crew or showing how it gets rid of ballast fan noise etc. It also provides me with the ability to hear if wind machines etc are at an acceptable level.

 

I think it is a very useful tool to have as long as you run your other tracks without processing for Sound Post. I am getting a rental on it too as that was important to me to not offer it for free.

 

Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for comments everyone, they're very helpful. As for some of the videos I've seen, I have to say i was very impressed. Personally as of now I'm still building up my gear and I'm not looking into get one yet. In my opinion, I would rather it be kept our own personal secret, if you know what I mean. I could see Constantine's point of calling it a dangerous tool to have on a film set. I do however see the point of using it for say a WWE wrestling match, boxing, or why not a sporting event like that past World Cup. But even in that regard, I'm still on the fence. I think that as a fan or spectator, we're loosing out on the experience of the emotional thrill we get from a live event by simply watching it from the comfort of our own home. So until then, I'll wait for a production that really requires one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember that to use this one, you're giving up an input or two. You might even want something like a MixPre3 slaved via timecode rec run. Then again, it could  make sense not to even record it, just use it as a tool to pick your battles. Stick the output into your camera return on a 6-series mixer for quick A/B:ing, for example. Personally, I don't think I'd get one. I prefer the tried and true oldschool methods of getting rid of noise. Everything good starts from at least a half-decent recording, and everything great needs a good recording to begin with.

I totally get using the DNS for providing better dailies or for better clarity on IFBs. Is latency ever an issue, though?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alejandro Reyes said:

I do however see the point of using it for say a WWE wrestling match, boxing, or why not a sporting event like that past World Cup. But even in that regard, I'm still on the fence. I think that as a fan or spectator, we're loosing out on the experience of the emotional thrill we get from a live event by simply watching it from the comfort of our own home.

 

It's a very powerful tool, we used a couple of the eight-channel version of Eurovision Song Contest 2014 in Copenhagen. Even treated as much as possible, the acoustics of the venue - an old shipyard made of steel scaffolding and metal panels - very still troublesome. The Cedar noise-reduction worked wonders making the presenters microphones sound much better - both on TV and inside the venue. So for live events, the Cedar boxes are really handy.

 

A colleague used eight-channels of Cedar noise-reduction for a TV show, and he later told me that he ended up backing it off a bit, because he were loosing the "live feeling". That's how good it works.

 

Another colleague uses it for Sweden's Got Talent, and it helps to keep much of the audience noise out of the jury's microphones, so that no further processing is needed. It's a live-on-tape show.

 

I haven't used the DNS2 for EFP-sound yet, but if I even do, I would probably split the boom and record both the original and the noise-reduced sound, and use channel two to noise-reduce the camera feed. But I probably wouldn't listen to it too much in my headphones, because that would probably give me false comfort. But I don't know until I have used it in the field.

 

There are a lot of recording situation where you know that not much sound editing will be done - because it's done by a video editor. In those cases the DNS2 will be a perfect companion, but do make sure to add it to your rental fees, because otherwise you're just spoiling the production with a pretty expensive and great-sounding box.

 

Regarding your questions, I don't think that you have to buy a DNS2 yet, as long as your clients aren't asking for it.

 

Will it pick up in reputation? Probably.

 

 

Cheers

Fred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/19/2018 at 3:54 AM, Alejandro Reyes said:

what would be a good reason to not purchase one?

Because it would have a very poor R.O.I. for me.
We're running a business here, so as much as I'd love to own a DNS2 I know there are better options when it comes to sound gear for me to spend my money on. 

 

On 7/19/2018 at 9:53 AM, Tony Johnson said:

The politics are interesting as Constantin alluded to and i will not be advertising that i have the DNS to the crew or showing how it gets rid of ballast fan noise etc.


That is a really good idea, use it, but use it discretely! Without other crew people on set knowing fully about it or its capabilities. 

The DNS2 is still a very very new product, I suppose this wizardry magic will be harder to keep hidden from being general knowledge known by everyone as in the future the years pass by. 

On 7/19/2018 at 5:55 PM, Ilari Sivil said:

I totally get using the DNS for providing better dailies or for better clarity on IFBs. Is latency ever an issue, though?


It claims to offer near zero latency. (actual zero latency being prevented by the laws of physics)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, IronFilm said:

It claims to offer near zero latency. (actual zero latency being prevented by the laws of physics)

 

Added to this of course comes the out and back in latency of the recorder itself, but that’s probably only going to be a few ms as well, so not much of an issue.

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
Sign in to follow this  

×