Mark Orusa Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 I personally would advise against TC on an audio track unless post is asking for it. If post is unprepared and doesn't understand TC on an audio track, they may be very confused and annoyed by the obnoxious sound. A mono scratch track can sync 2nd system sound just fine using Plural Eyes. Mark O. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al mcguire Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 I ha >I personally would advise against TC on an audio track unless post is asking for it. If post is unprepared and doesn't understand TC on an audio track, they may be very confused and annoyed by the obnoxious sound.< So true, I had one Producer refer to TimeCode as " that awful industrial noise ". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted October 23, 2013 Report Share Posted October 23, 2013 The setup would be: the trx742 and a connected stereo-mic mounted on a dslr, to record the on-camera sound properly, then record the tc-signal on the dslr to sync it up in post. Additionally I would be able to distribute multiple trx900 on the talents to record the sound on them directly. of course, these trx900 must be synced with the trx742 as well. Great you can sync it up with the trx900. A bit of a drawback is, that I would have to mount two boxes on the camera. But thanks for all the advice! If that's how you're editors want to do it, ok, but this seems crazy. How will you monitor all those sources? What you describe seems like you just hit record, and let them run away. It's great that the tx's record, but that is no replacement for areal mixer / recorder where you can monitor and adjust. Also in your scenario, post would have to sync multiple mono bwav files, instead of one master recording. I would suggest some long talks about workflow before you dive into this, personally i only see drawbacks setting up this way instead of a more traditional route sending everything back to your mixer and monitoring it all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ze Frias Posted October 23, 2013 Report Share Posted October 23, 2013 If that's how you're editors want to do it, ok, but this seems crazy. How will you monitor all those sources? What you describe seems like you just hit record, and let them run away. It's great that the tx's record, but that is no replacement for areal mixer / recorder where you can monitor and adjust. Also in your scenario, post would have to sync multiple mono bwav files, instead of one master recording. I would suggest some long talks about workflow before you dive into this, personally i only see drawbacks setting up this way instead of a more traditional route sending everything back to your mixer and monitoring it all. +1. There's not much to add. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DodoHu Posted October 24, 2013 Report Share Posted October 24, 2013 If that's how you're editors want to do it, ok, but this seems crazy. How will you monitor all those sources? What you describe seems like you just hit record, and let them run away. It's great that the tx's record, but that is no replacement for areal mixer / recorder where you can monitor and adjust. Also in your scenario, post would have to sync multiple mono bwav files, instead of one master recording. I would suggest some long talks about workflow before you dive into this, personally i only see drawbacks setting up this way instead of a more traditional route sending everything back to your mixer and monitoring it all. Since I am doing this part of post it is no problem. In the setup I am using now, I record to a nomad 10 and feed tc to the camera via a ERX100TC. Then I sync up the clips with one click using LTCconvert. Works perfectly if I am working as sound guy. But if I shoot all on my own, I have to carry and control the nomad while trying to operate the camera. Almost impossible. That is why I am looking for a more portable and more simple setup. What would interest me is, whether the zaxcom software allows to combine the multiple mono bwave files into one file? Otherwise it would mean to run LTCconvert several times, which would cost a lot of time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Orusa Posted October 24, 2013 Report Share Posted October 24, 2013 The multiple mono files would have to have the same start time when combined to a polyphonic wav file, otherwise they could be a few frames off from each other. I don't know of any software that will automatically do that. Simple combining of mono files can be done with WaveAgent: http://www.sounddevices.com/products/waveagent/downloads/ Mark O. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted October 25, 2013 Report Share Posted October 25, 2013 Since I am doing this part of post it is no problem. In the setup I am using now, I record to a nomad 10 and feed tc to the camera via a ERX100TC. Then I sync up the clips with one click using LTCconvert. Works perfectly if I am working as sound guy. But if I shoot all on my own, I have to carry and control the nomad while trying to operate the camera. Almost impossible. That is why I am looking for a more portable and more simple setup. What would interest me is, whether the zaxcom software allows to combine the multiple mono bwave files into one file? Otherwise it would mean to run LTCconvert several times, which would cost a lot of time. There is no software I know of to take multiple files from different recorders, sync them, and create a single poly wav from it automatically. In your scenario, the trx742 would work great as a higher quality audio recorder in place of your camera, but you start adding wireless lavs to that, and you still have no way to monitor your audio. Sounds like a bad idea to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DodoHu Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 Sounds like a bad idea to me. You are probably right. Might have to look for another solution, like an Zoom H6 and an external timecode-generator, that is plugged into both, the H6 and the camera... Thanks for all the advice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 You are probably right. Might have to look for another solution, like an Zoom H6 and an external timecode-generator, that is plugged into both, the H6 and the camera... Thanks for all the advice. That's not the part of your setup I was referring to. The trx742 is going to be a higher quality recorder than the zoom. Not being able to monitor audio, I.e. When adding trx900 wireless lavs without receivers and a mixer, is what I was referring to as a bad idea. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 " an external timecode-generator, that is plugged into both, the H6 and the camera... " neither zoom products, nor dSLR's are SMPTE/EBU TC capable... unless you are using TC on an audio track... in which case workflow testing is needed... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted October 26, 2013 Report Share Posted October 26, 2013 " an external timecode-generator, that is plugged into both, the H6 and the camera... " neither zoom products, nor dSLR's are SMPTE/EBU TC capable... unless you are using TC on an audio track... in which case workflow testing is needed... Re-read the thread Mike, that has already been addressed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VASI Posted January 13, 2014 Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 Curious about the name "QRX". Q from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthias Richter Posted January 13, 2014 Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 Quattro - 4 channel receiver Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vale Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 I don't know if this is the proper topic... just asking myself if there could be possible to have in the same screen of the QRX the gain level info of both channels, when used in dual mode. It seems to me very useful to have them at a glance, instead of switching A/B between that two. Especially when you need to change them during a take (I use a Fusion or Mix12 knobs for the purpose). If not, I guess it could be a good upgrade to the QRX screens scheme. Just my thoughts. v. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Todd Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 +1 That would be nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Orusa Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 I don't know if this is the proper topic... just asking myself if there could be possible to have in the same screen of the QRX the gain level info of both channels, when used in dual mode. It seems to me very useful to have them at a glance, instead of switching A/B between that two. Especially when you need to change them during a take (I use a Fusion or Mix12 knobs for the purpose). If not, I guess it could be a good upgrade to the QRX screens scheme. Just my thoughts. v. Right here: http://www.zaxcom.net Phone: 973-835-5000 Contact page: http://zaxcom.net/company/contact/ Mark O. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.279748a58a2b862b7aa5f3b84126e232.png)
.thumb.jpg.b62d3b0667e4ee0fd0c7f8e5d8c15591.jpg)
Recommended Posts
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.